Over the last couple years, I've spent a bunch of time pondering such things as gross vs. net scores. The Boone and Crockett scoring system. Tenn. Deer Registry and all kinds of related topics. Kinda makes my head hurt. I've killed several "good" bucks. Several that GROSS Pope and Young. A few more that GROSS Tennessee Registry. However, when the REALITY of the scoring "system" hits, these "good" bucks sometimes fall short of the record books. WHY...because of something called SYMETRY! It seems that many years ago, when this scoring system was first implemented it was used as a record for keeping up with the where and whens of bucks killed all over the country (and world). It probably wasn't intended to be "fair" to the buck's antlers.

Here is a realization I made just yesterday, while learning of this bucks score. It is entirely possible, to have a truly MASSIVE, long tined, wide spread, NON_SYMETRICAL buck score LOW while appearing VERY impressive. And have a average spread, PERFECTLY symetrical, average mass yet long tined 10 point score higher, even though the antlers weigh several pounds LESS than the non-symetrical buck.

This is because the difference between the two main beams, as well as the "abnormal" points count AGAINST your total score.

My buck GROSSED nearly 170 inches of antler (including about a 17 inch spread). But, as a typical, it NETTED about 136. This is still a GREAT buck but as a non-typical...the "abnormal points" COUNT. So, to give credit where credit was due, I thought it better to go non-typical.

Now I know why MANY hunters only talk in terms of gross score when talking about a buck. I wish someone would start a system that counted ALL inches of antler, no deductions, and inside spread only. THis way, we'd have the inside spread and ALL bone measured. In other words, the BTR INCLUDING inside spread credit.

BTW, thanks Daryl!

102

My taxidermists and a couple other guys aged him at at least 6.5,