Pending New SCI World Record Mule Deer

[boneaddict]

I figure 25-26 on the frame.  They must be counting that stupid kicker.  There is NO WAY he is 29 inches.   I wonder how he would measure up with Boone?

[Slider]

not going to see a typical much bigger than that in any book

Yea what Phool said!!! The reason he may look small is because he is not wide. And because it is a front view and you really can't see the depth of his forks. He is a Giant Typical!!!

[boneaddict]

I don't think that angle gives you the full appreciation of what his g4s look like.  They are absolutely INCREDIBLE.  I also think with that score, his mains are probably longer that what the picture shows.

[Pathfinder101]

I see what you mean.  The picture is deceiving because of the angle and the ears.  He only looks about as wide as his ears though (even if they were propped up), but the text says he is 29" wide not counting the cheater. 
I guess 226" is outlandish for a typical.  Lots of higher scoring deer out there, but all non-typicals.

[boneaddict]

I still think its  that its 29 (without the cheater).  If he is, better show Charlie this guys cape as he has record book EARS.  The money I have left after Obama has had his hands in my pockets is that its 26.

[Pathfinder101]

If he is, better show Charlie this guys cape as he has record book EARS.

...Maybe a new SCI Category...?

[jackelope]

I figure 25-26 on the frame.  They must be counting that stupid kicker.  There is NO WAY he is 29 inches.   I wonder how he would measure up with Boone?

209 and change unofficial

[boneaddict]

I certainyl could buy that with those forks. I figured a hair or two over 200.  I'm trying to see if he has 2 eyeguards or not. 

[huntnphool]

I guess 226" is outlandish for a typical.  Lots of higher scoring deer out there, but all non-typicals.

Exactly!!

 and 29" has to be including the cheater, love those G4's though.

[Bigshooter]

The same picture is on the cover of Muley Heaven Two, I believe.  He looks big on the cover but in the video he looks huge.

[Slider]

The difference between Boone and Crockett and S.C.I. is basically B.C. scoring system tries to make a PERFECT rack out of the animals antler's while it's being scored. S.C.I. doesn't.

Basically, the difference between SCI scoring and B&C scoring, is that SCI does not deduct for horns or antlers not being symmetrical.

Where this hurts the score is the case where a point or tine exists on one one side, but the corresponding point either didn't grow as long or was broken on the other side. Under the B&C scoring, the lengths of both of these points would be entered, then the difference in their length would be subtracted from the sub-total. Under the SCI scoring, the lengths of both of these points would be entered, and there would not be any deductions.

For Typical entries, under B&C, lengths of non-typical points are entered, then subtracted. Under SCI scoring, lengths of non-typical points are only entered in the supplemental information section and are not included in the total score. Basically, under both systems, only typical measurements are counted for the total score.

[Pathfinder101]

I guess 226" is outlandish for a typical.  Lots of higher scoring deer out there, but all non-typicals.

Exactly!!

 and 29" has to be including the cheater, love those G4's though.

Text says that the spread is 29" NOT including the cheater.  Doesn't look right to me either. 

[jjhunter]

I can think of two typical frames off the top of my head that would dwarf this buck.  The bigfoot buck (40" frame buck shot by Dennis Winch) has a 238" ish typical frame.  The Mundy buck has the largest typical frame ever at 246" - it nets 238"!  No comparison.  Some of the largest typical frames are hidden in B&C under the non-typical category.   This buck is supposed to net 209" - I doubt it.  There are a bunch of deer that beat it either way.

[huntnphool]

Where did you guys get the 209 score from, I dont see any reference to it on the page. If that thing grosses 226" I don't see 17" of deductions either. Not that it matters but I prefer the SCI scoring myself, if the buck grows it I think it should be counted, as far as B&C goes I pay little attention to the net, I go by gross

[jackelope]

he's a mossback buck too...
mossbacks site says he is 236 gross 226 net.
scroll down to the bottom.
http://mossback.com/Home/html/2008_bucks.html

i just read where one of the other guys posted earlier in the thread he was 209 net.  jjhunter maybe?