Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New Trophy's
New trophy room comments
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Classifieds
Trophy Room
New items
New comments
Latest content
Latest updates
Latest reviews
Author list
Series list
Search showcase
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Tennessee Hunting Forums
Deer Hunting Forum
Politics even in our deer hunting world
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TheLBLman" data-source="post: 5845236" data-attributes="member: 1409"><p>Opinions vary, but I have no issue with spread being counted, as all other things being equal, a wider rack is more impressive than a narrow rack. Besides, relatively little of the total score comes from the spread. I'd even like to see the outside, instead of the inside, spread counted in the score.</p><p></p><p>The B&C/P&Y scoring systems certainly aren't perfect, and if they were re-tooled from the get-go, probably should find a way to give more credit for mass than tine length. "Mass" (circumferences or diameters of the beams <u>and tines</u>) is really what stands out as "big" vs not so big.</p><p></p><p>Too much of the total score simply comes from tine lengths (and the number of tines), my opinion.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TheLBLman, post: 5845236, member: 1409"] Opinions vary, but I have no issue with spread being counted, as all other things being equal, a wider rack is more impressive than a narrow rack. Besides, relatively little of the total score comes from the spread. I'd even like to see the outside, instead of the inside, spread counted in the score. The B&C/P&Y scoring systems certainly aren't perfect, and if they were re-tooled from the get-go, probably should find a way to give more credit for mass than tine length. "Mass" (circumferences or diameters of the beams [U]and tines[/U]) is really what stands out as "big" vs not so big. Too much of the total score simply comes from tine lengths (and the number of tines), my opinion. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Tennessee Hunting Forums
Deer Hunting Forum
Politics even in our deer hunting world
Top