new state record?

[quadrafire]

First of all, I don't think anyone said it's not a nice buck, nobody can argue that. Second, some of you guys act as those a 170's class buck in Washington is a insult. Few hunters in this state have ever tagged a 170 class Washington Muley, at least a "honest" 170 class that is.

 Everyone is entitled to their opinions on here, agree to disagree and move on, some of you guys really need to relax.

And then there are those of us that have never even Seen a 170 class buck, and wouldn't know it if we did.
  smiley added

[huntnphool]

First of all, I don't think anyone said it's not a nice buck, nobody can argue that. Second, some of you guys act as those a 170's class buck in Washington is a insult. Few hunters in this state have ever tagged a 170 class Washington Muley, at least a "honest" 170 class that is.

 Everyone is entitled to their opinions on here, agree to disagree and move on, some of you guys really need to relax.

And then there are those of us that have never even Seen a 170 class buck, and wouldn't know it if we did.

you'd know it Quad

[whacker1]

I have only seen 2 - second one died, but after drying ended up at 169 6/8

[boneaddict]

MOST "Booner" bucks seen in this state are 160-170 inch deer.     Then there is the occasional 150

[LDennis24]

Looks like it may go high 180's easy. I read somewhere about how the majority of 180+ booner mule deer have deep forks and not as much width as most hunters would think... mass and height is more important than spread and this buck seems to have both. I'm just guessing but his forks seem to be about a foot long and mass isn't spectacular, velvets very deceiving... mass maybe 7 at the bases?

[huntnphool]

Looks like it may go high 180's easy.

Which is about where my original prediction put it, "a 170 class main frame with a dropper"

[blacktailer]

MOST "Booner" bucks seen in this state are 160-170 inch deer.     Then there is the occasional 150

You hit the nail on the head with that one...   Nobody is trying to take away from that being a heck of a great buck anywhere, let alone Wa.  Headlines reading New State Record  is always going to drum up a lot of comments and drama.   I certainly don't see 200 inches of bone or anything close to it for that matter, but I have not seen it held it or measured it so I'll leave that to those who have pulled a tape on it.   Would I be tickled to death to shoot a deer like that?  Hell yes...

[Karl Blanchard]

So I scratched down some numbers and came up with 211 4/8.  Now I am throwing out a disclaimer because I can't really get a feel on the length of the mainbeams so I went a little on the high side and gave him 24" for both and I rounded up to the nearest half inch on all my G measurements just to error on the high side.  Also gave him a 23" spread credit.   So I am saying absolutely a 200+ gross scoring buck but no way it can make 220   Buck of a lifetime for sure!

[link]

It is so hard to judge those photos. The first one looks like he's pushing it forward, and the second one is head on, can't really judge a lot other than width. Based on the photos, I can actually come up with a high 180's buck, if that dropper is 10". 16" 2's, 10" 3's, 9" 4's, 23" beams, 22 spread. Mass is tough with the velvet, but maybe 17 a side? I come up with about 188.  I am higher than most of you on here, but I do not see 200, let alone 220. Again, it is so tough to score a photo. But besides all that, that is an awesome buck and one I would be proud to have taken. Congratulations to the hunter!

[Woodchuck]

First of all, I don't think anyone said it's not a nice buck, nobody can argue that. Second, some of you guys act as those a 170's class buck in Washington is a insult. Few hunters in this state have ever tagged a 170 class Washington Muley, at least a "honest" 170 class that is.

 Everyone is entitled to their opinions on here, agree to disagree and move on, some of you guys really need to relax.

And then there are those of us that have never even Seen a 170 class buck, and wouldn't know it if we did.

you'd know it Quad

Does my HSLAH method of scoring elk work on deer?

[Caseyd]

MOST "Booner" bucks seen in this state are 160-170 inch deer.     Then there is the occasional 150

What would that big 4x4 you had a picture of last year or year before score out at?

[Karl Blanchard]

link,  I had pretty close to the same but I would have to dissagree on the g3's and 4's.  His 3 on the right side only forks a few inches above the main and I'm bettin that puppy is 13" long!  Also those 4's are longer than his 3's and I gave him 18 and 18 4/8 on his mass.  I guessed his dropper at 12 but looking at the capped picture again I think you are closer at 10.  don't forget to add 6.5" of eyeguards.

[boneaddict]

I through up a set of pics of my State record shed along with a couple bucks to show what a 220 buck looked like.  I didn't want it to seem like I was trashing this guys thread, but I guess it really isn't his thread or his story.   Should I make the post or not?

That 4x4 I guessed maybe would go 190.  I wasn't sure if hed make it or not as his fronts were a bit weak.  I think we settled on short of the 190 mark.

[link]

Looking at the field photo, I may have underestimated the 3's and 4's. I did give him 3" for the eyeguards. It is tough to tell on the mass though, being in velvet. A buck that has 18" of mass is a super heavy buck. I'm not going to pick it apart though. Scoring photos is not really scoring, its somewhat educated guessing!

[Karl Blanchard]

Looking at the field photo, I may have underestimated the 3's and 4's. I did give him 3" for the eyeguards. It is tough to tell on the mass though, being in velvet. A buck that has 18" of mass is a super heavy buck. I'm not going to pick it apart though. Scoring photos is not really scoring, its somewhat educated guessing!

Agreed 100%!  It sure is fun to guess though!