# For those of you who like to score (UPDATE)



## kbuck1 (Aug 29, 2014)

Curious to see what you guys think this buck scored. My wife killed him several weeks after these photos were taken. He was officially scored. I'll post up the score in a few days. I had tried guessing what he'd score before she killed him and I was about 6 inches off. I was very close  on all the measurements except the beams.

He was officially scored as a typical but here's both typical and non typical scores

Gross  typical  142 6/8
net typical        128 7/8

Gross non typical 152 1/8
net non typical     147 5/8

I think a lot of people dont realize that when scoring as a typical the abnormal points never get added to the gross but are subtracted in the end. On this particular buck he lost 18 6/8 inches off the typical gross just because of the abnormal points. Thats not counting the side to side deductions from the typical points.  Some have pointed out that gross scores dont matter and some argue that the net score doesnt matter. To me its more about the gross because thats what truly tells you what the buck grew. If I would have came on here and said Im about to post pics of a 128 inch buck my wife killed no one would have expected to see a picture of a buck like this.


----------



## doeboy1 (Aug 29, 2014)

First off Im jealous of your wife. That's a nice buck. Ill go with 138 net.


----------



## kbuck1 (Aug 29, 2014)

doeboy1 said:


> First off Im jealous of your wife. That's a nice buck. Ill go with 138 net.



He was scored as a typical and it brought the net way down. I'll give the gross scores as a typical and non typical as well as net scores for both.  FYI, its not the same buck she's holding the horns to in my avatar


----------



## Pessell Creek (Aug 29, 2014)

That's a tricky one. Short brows, good tine length, short beams, splits tines...... 141. Outstanding deer no matter what he scored!!


----------



## Pessell Creek (Aug 29, 2014)

Gross


----------



## kevincox (Aug 29, 2014)

137 Gross


----------



## strutlife (Aug 29, 2014)

143 5/8


----------



## bsanders (Aug 29, 2014)

Gross 154


----------



## MFOSTER (Aug 29, 2014)

136 5/8 net


----------



## aroberts (Aug 29, 2014)

Gross-160


----------



## GA DAWG (Aug 29, 2014)

Gross 158


----------



## bone2112 (Aug 29, 2014)

TOO MUCH MATH. Nice though.


----------



## antharper (Aug 29, 2014)

145in gross. Nice buck


----------



## TurkeyDreamer (Aug 29, 2014)

He looks much more impressive in the picture with your wife holding him although she looks petite and her arms are stretched out so it's difficult to tell because of the forced perspective. Nonetheless, I'll go with 148 4/8 gross.


----------



## fowl player (Aug 29, 2014)

im gonna high ball for the sake of the thread guess and go with 156 gross hes def over 140 somewhere


----------



## Hammer Spank (Aug 29, 2014)

348"


----------



## AParker511 (Aug 29, 2014)

he'd score a place on the wall, that's all I know.


----------



## M80 (Aug 29, 2014)

Gross 158. Net 147


----------



## Buckbuster69 (Aug 30, 2014)

Not a ton of mass but good tine length and and points galore. I would say Gross 159 5/8 and net 149 3/8 either way great buck. Was that the buck she killed in Spalding Co. last year


----------



## Pessell Creek (Aug 30, 2014)

I didn't see the pic with your wife holding it when I first posted. The trail cam pics don't look nearly as good. I'm gonna say he's at least 150" after looking at that.


----------



## mguthrie (Aug 30, 2014)

GA DAWG said:


> Gross 158



This is the number I came up with


----------



## 01Foreman400 (Aug 30, 2014)

163" gross


----------



## kbuck1 (Aug 30, 2014)

Buckbuster69 said:


> Not a ton of mass but good tine length and and points galore. I would say Gross 159 5/8 and net 149 3/8 either way great buck. Was that the buck she killed in Spalding Co. last year



She killed that buck in spalding ut it was 2010. She killed another buck that same season. He was a 134 inch 10 pointer.


----------



## meathammer (Aug 30, 2014)

151 dead on the money


----------



## Jeff Phillips (Aug 30, 2014)

I got 142 net.


----------



## Doubletrouble (Aug 31, 2014)

Killed at the old folks community?


----------



## brian lee (Aug 31, 2014)

I'm gonna say 157 gross. Net mid 140's


----------



## huckhgh (Aug 31, 2014)

I'm guessing gross: 153.125 & net: 138.675


----------



## DOUBLEDROPTINE (Aug 31, 2014)

147 gross


----------



## kbuck1 (Aug 31, 2014)

Doubletrouble said:


> Killed at the old folks community?



Not sure where you are talking about but no, it was killed on a 700 acre hunting lease


----------



## Wallhanger (Aug 31, 2014)

148 gross, 130 net


----------



## Doubletrouble (Aug 31, 2014)

kbuck1 said:


> Not sure where you are talking about but no, it was killed on a 700 acre hunting lease



Sun city


----------



## kbuck1 (Aug 31, 2014)

No. I know a few who hunt close to there but not me. This buck was killed on the west side of spalding county.  Do we know each other?


----------



## sman (Aug 31, 2014)

Gross 162.

Nets are for fish.


----------



## APPierce0628 (Aug 31, 2014)

153 4/8 gross.. not good at scoring though.


----------



## bamaboy (Aug 31, 2014)

I say 154 inches gross


----------



## hrstille (Sep 1, 2014)

Gross 159 6/8. Net 141 1/8.


----------



## Eye Wreckin (Sep 2, 2014)

Spalding county. I'm quite fimilar with Spalding county to say the least. I think I may have a good idea of where this was taken but I'll shhh. 

What's your name btw?


----------



## Eye Wreckin (Sep 2, 2014)

Doubletrouble said:


> Killed at the old folks community?


Yep, right over there off Hole 9.


----------



## Eye Wreckin (Sep 2, 2014)

I'm also curious to know who you are double trouble.


----------



## Warrenco (Sep 2, 2014)

511 1/4 give or take 400"


----------



## hawghntr21 (Sep 2, 2014)

145 gross...great buck regardless of score.


----------



## GTHunter007 (Sep 2, 2014)

As a typical I say he grosses around 144, nets down around 132 or so.  

As a Non-typical he grosses around 152 and nets around 148


----------



## Chadx1981 (Sep 2, 2014)

153


----------



## XJfire75 (Sep 2, 2014)

156"


----------



## Eye Wreckin (Sep 2, 2014)

Score guess. 

154 7/8 on the dot


----------



## GASeminole (Sep 2, 2014)

145 (net. Not sure why people talk about gross, it is meaningless.)


----------



## kbuck1 (Sep 2, 2014)

Eye Wreckin said:


> I'm also curious to know who you are double trouble.



Thought I saw where they had banned you.maybe it was another user name


----------



## M80 (Sep 2, 2014)

Alright what did he score.


----------



## bsanders (Sep 2, 2014)

Yea.......do tell


----------



## 01Foreman400 (Sep 2, 2014)

kbuck1 said:


> Thought I saw where they had banned you.maybe it was another user name



He is setting some records with posts.


----------



## nfouche50 (Sep 2, 2014)

156


----------



## Chadx1981 (Sep 3, 2014)

when you gonna tell us


----------



## kbuck1 (Sep 3, 2014)

original post updated


----------



## sman (Sep 3, 2014)

I missed by 10. 

Probably on mass and main beams.


----------



## jimmy2sticks (Sep 3, 2014)

Just curious why would he be officially scored as a typical and not a nontypical?


----------



## GTHunter007 (Sep 3, 2014)

jimmy2sticks said:


> Just curious why would he be officially scored as a typical and not a nontypical?



This buck to me IS a typical with a couple abnormal points.  Not what I would have in mind if I pictured a non-typical buck.  

For the sake of discussion though, I would say this is my wife's 150.  At least that conveys the amount of bone, 128 just doesn't tell the story of a beast like this.  If that was my wife's buck she wouldn't be telling people she killed a 128...it'd be a 150" deer every time.  LOL

In the non-typical, symmetry of the typical frame is still harped on...in Boone and Crocket scoring anyway, but the abnormals get added on.


----------



## kbuck1 (Sep 3, 2014)

jimmy2sticks said:


> Just curious why would he be officially scored as a typical and not a nontypical?



Its based on percentages. A non typical has to outscore a typical by more than 14 percent to be actually considered bigger. It explains it well in the truck buck scoring rules. Its based off of the boone and Crockett minimums.  This one was very close and could have went either way really.  I think it faired better as a typical by less than a percent if I remember correctly

If you see where they scored it as 75.809 percent. If you take the 128 and 7/8 and divide it by the boone and crocket minimum of 170 as a typical it comes to 75.809. If you take the non typical score of 147 5/8 and divide it by the boone and crocket non typical minimum of 195 inches you would get 75.705 percent    

 I hope this explains it


----------



## jmharris23 (Sep 3, 2014)

I'm all about the gross score


----------



## kevincox (Sep 3, 2014)

I got within 5 inches on gross. I'm satisfied with that from just looking at a pic


----------



## M80 (Sep 3, 2014)

I hang my head on this one. Good job gthunter cause I thought you was under. Just looking at the deer by himself I can see the end results being true but your wife must be a little lady cause the deer looks huge with her holding it. I guess my problem was focusing on that pic with your wife in it. Oh well. Y'all don't listen to me when I go to ohio and say I saw a 150 lol. More like a 120.


----------



## MFOSTER (Sep 3, 2014)

Congrats to your wife a great buck  that's why scores are for ball games


----------



## Eye Wreckin (Sep 3, 2014)

kbuck1 said:


> Thought I saw where they had banned you.maybe it was another user name


Yeah, another user name. 

Two different people where accessing my account causing misconception, and unable to identify who I was, so a made new page, new name 

I wouldn't have that picture as my avatar if I wasn't allowed back here. Lol


----------



## jimmy2sticks (Sep 3, 2014)

As to the typical/non typical I guess that makes since,  I just figured it was one or the other, thanks!


----------



## Eye Wreckin (Sep 3, 2014)

Eye was off by 2


----------



## hrstille (Sep 4, 2014)

Eye Wreckin said:


> Eye was off by 2



Weren't you the guy that posted the picture of the buck you thought would go p&y? This deer would barely make p&y. Compare the picture of your deer versus this buck and see if you still believe your buck will be p&y.


----------



## hrstille (Sep 4, 2014)

I'm not trying to bash you. I'm just saying trail can pics can be deceiving. Your buck is a fine one but not sure he's a p&y class buck.


----------



## GASeminole (Sep 4, 2014)

Looking back on the pictures, there are two things that a 150 class buck will typically have, that you do not see here:

1. Main beam (from side view, pics 1 and 3) should extend past nose

2. Inside spread (pic 2) should be well outside the ears

A very fine buck nonetheless, certainly a mature trophy for Spalding, and a great point of how bad most of us are about zooming in on calcium carbonate. If we magnify it while having all the time in the world on the internet, what do we do when he comes around the corner behind a doe and we have about 4 seconds to make a shot? 

Knowing the score, I would shoot that buck every day and twice on Sunday, regardless of where I was in the world.


----------



## kbuck1 (Sep 4, 2014)

GASeminole said:


> Looking back on the pictures, there are two things that a 150 class buck will typically have, that you do not see here:
> 
> 1. Main beam (from side view, pics 1 and 3) should extend past nose
> 
> ...



Anyone on here would have shot him. He's mature and he's over 150


----------



## kbuck1 (Sep 4, 2014)

Also, the buck in my avatar is 154 2/8 with an inside spread of 14 inches. So, to say that they should be outside there ears to be 150 is misleading. Two examples heee of bucks over 150 that are not outside there ears


----------



## huckhgh (Sep 4, 2014)

1 inch off on gross!


----------



## GTHunter007 (Sep 4, 2014)

GASeminole said:


> Looking back on the pictures, there are two things that a 150 class buck will typically have, that you do not see here:
> 
> 1. Main beam (from side view, pics 1 and 3) should extend past nose
> 
> ...



That is the best use of trail cameras...know before he walks out.  

Trying to pigeon hole score class of deer into traits they "typically have" is an absurd thing to do.  A 12" wide buck just needs to make up 6 total inches in tine length to erase that outside the ears comment, A 22" inside spread can debunk the main beams beyond the nose comment.  

No doubt, at first glance this looks like a 140 class buck IMO, then you see the kickers.


----------



## GASeminole (Sep 4, 2014)

kbuck1 said:


> Also, the buck in my avatar is 154 2/8 with an inside spread of 14 inches. So, to say that they should be outside there ears to be 150 is misleading. Two examples heee of bucks over 150 that are not outside there ears



"Gross typical 142 6/8
net typical 128 7/8

Gross non typical 152 1/8
net non typical 147 5/8"

How is that 2 examples of bucks over 150? Gross means nothing


----------



## GASeminole (Sep 4, 2014)

kbuck1 said:


> Also, the buck in my avatar is 154 2/8 with an inside spread of 14 inches. So, to say that they should be outside there ears to be 150 is misleading. Two examples heee of bucks over 150 that are not outside there ears



There is only one buck in Spalding cty records between 152 6/8 and 157 6/8. That is a 154 even, killed by Daniel Ferman in 1986. Is that you, Daniel?


----------



## kbuck1 (Sep 4, 2014)

Theres actually 8 in the 150's. Not sure what your point is.
http://webapp.dnr.state.ga.us/wrd/deer.php


If you want to call me Daniel you can. The one that grosses 152 and 1/8 is one example and the one in my avatar is the other example.  He is 154 and 2/8.  

The numbers you posted are from the same buck


----------



## GASeminole (Sep 4, 2014)

A buck that grosses 152 1/8 is not a 150 class buck. A buck that nets 150+ is a 150 class buck. 152 1/8 is not the score, the score is 147 5/8.

P&Y and B&C records (the ones that count) are net scores. 

You are using only part of the equation, and calling it a 150 when it isn't. 

For someone who has taken the time to have them scored, and then come on here and advertize your scores, I would expect you to have more respect for the system. That is my point.


----------



## kbuck1 (Sep 4, 2014)

Its really not worth arguing about. You cant have a net score wiyhout a gross score first. So, the gross score isnt irrelevant.  If you were to kill a 200 inch gross deer and hey netted down to lets say 160. Im sure you would tell all your friends you killed a 200 inch deer. Lets face it, the gross score is what tells everyone how much bone a buck really has. Most on here would agree.  You are the exception.


----------



## GASeminole (Sep 4, 2014)

kbuck1 said:


> Its really not worth arguing about. You cant have a net score wiyhout a gross score first. So, the gross score isnt irrelevant.  If you were to kill a 200 inch gross deer and hey netted down to lets say 160. Im sure you would tell all your friends you killed a 200 inch deer. Lets face it, the gross score is what tells everyone how much bone a buck really has. Most on here would agree.  You are the exception.



I hear you

We can agree to disagree, but when I say a 150 class typically has x or y characteristics, don't say I'm wrong and then use 140 class deer as your justification. Im talking about a real 150.

I hope you kill a monster this year


----------



## dmclain1 (Sep 4, 2014)

kbuck1 said:


> Its really not worth arguing about. You cant have a net score wiyhout a gross score first. So, the gross score isnt irrelevant.  If you were to kill a 200 inch gross deer and hey netted down to lets say 160. Im sure you would tell all your friends you killed a 200 inch deer. Lets face it, the gross score is what tells everyone how much bone a buck really has. Most on here would agree.  You are the exception.



Totally agree with this. That's an awesome buck, and I would be calling it a 150 as well, because that's what it is. 

Hypothetical question to ga seminole..... If applying for a new job would you list your net income after taxes or gross income on the application?


----------



## kbuck1 (Sep 4, 2014)

GASeminole said:


> I hear you
> 
> We can agree to disagree, but when I say a 150 class typically has x or y characteristics, don't say I'm wrong and then use 140 class deer as your justification. Im talking about a real 150.
> 
> I hope you kill a monster this year



I never used a pic of a 140 class deer. The deer in the avatar as well as the one in the original post are both over 150. Period.  The one in the avatar which is the one I told you didnt go along with your characteristics grossed 154 2/8 and netted 148 6/8 as a typical. And nets 151 and 2/8 as a non typical.
I chose for it to be registered as a typical. Does that mean he isnt a 150 inch deer anymore? his horns are still the same. nothing changed about them. Just the number written in the record books is all that changes.  And as for your earlier post saying I came on here showing a 140 class deer and suggesting it was a 150 , you're wrong. I simply asked people to guess the score and then I posted the gross and net scores for both typical and non typical. people made there own decision about what he scores. Most people like myself realize it is a 150 class deer.


----------



## XJfire75 (Sep 5, 2014)

Nets are for fishing. 

And they take away from the actual size of the deers antlers. Why have them scored at all if you're gonna take several inches off.


----------



## bsanders (Sep 5, 2014)

1 7/8" is what I was off.


----------



## Chadx1981 (Sep 5, 2014)

?ya I'm good I said 153 I don't deduct


----------



## whitedog (Nov 26, 2014)

This is why, to me, net score is a waste of time talking about. All I want to know is how much bone he grew. To say this deer netted 128, gives you no idea of his real size. Two deer can net 128 and one of them may have 20 more inches of bone on his head if you set them side by side. Great deer kbuck!


----------

