Score this buck (video)

[RockAndSage]

A young 170's. Tell us what he scores next fall!

Same. That's a big rack on a young buck - no back sway, very little brisket hang, nose is still more pointy than roman...find that guy next year, for sure.

 

[RaggedHunter]

I'd put him in the mid 170's. Beautiful buck.

 

[Brad1974]

I would guess around 175" give or take, but I wouldn't pretend I'm good at scoring. No real analysis, just looks wide, looks tall, so I'd guess 175... However, it appears alot of others think about the same

 

[S.Clancy]

I think his main beams are longer than you would initially think since they curl in so much. And his G3's are really good. Maybe a little light on mass, but not crazy. It's hard to tell how wide he is.

MB- 22"+
G1- 1.5"
G2- 17"
G3- 9-10"
G4- 12-13"
Inside Spread- 20"
Total mass- 31-32"

My guess is he is right around 180", +/- 2" on either side

I don't know how I would pass that deer regardless of if he looks "young", which is totally subjective. He looks healthy and mature, so 3.5-5.5 yrs old. That's about as close as I get on the hoof.

 

[88man]

175 -180

 

[Whbull]

It’s likely around 180”

 

[Gbleet]

Looks 178s!

 

[Rich M]

That is almost exactly what I have on the wall - 160.

 

[efing001]

180

 

[Ckat]

I see this sentiment mentioned a lot when guessing deer scores. There are 8 mass measurements and I would think the difference on each measurement is less than an inch between an average mass buck and an above average mass buck. Therefore, it seems like mass would be less than 10" different (and that's probably on the high side) between two bucks of differing mass assuming everything else was equal. I haven't looked at a ton of score sheets to see the actual differences, just imagining what an extra inch of circumference would look like on an antler and it seems like that would be a lot. Seems like it would be easier to add multiple inches to each tine, therefore having more of an effect on the total score than mass. Having said all that, I would shoot a tight-racked, heavy buck over a long-tined, spindly buck if they were standing side by side!

That sentiment does not relate directly to the mass measurements themselves but, rather, to the side effects of a buck being light on mass. After years of studying, being wrong, and then analyzing why I was off in my estimates; I have come to realize that accurate field judgement really hinges on two major factors: 1) body size compared to average, and 2) mass compared to average. A buck that is smaller-bodied and/or thinner on mass will always appear wider and taller than they actually are = major ground shrinkage. A buck that is bigger-bodied and/or heavier on mass will lead to you being pleased when he hits the dirt. Above average mass hides inches EVERYWHERE, not just on the mass measurements. Everything will be at least as long as you thought it was pre-shot, if not longer. Determination of those two factors in the field can be difficult… especially if the buck is solo, but getting a good guess on those two factors has risen to the top of my priority list when judging a buck.

 

[Rossi]

Above average mass hides inches EVERYWHERE, not just on the mass measurements. Everything will be at least as long as you thought it was pre-shot, if not longer.

I 100% agree with this statement!