Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

Not to stir the pot...but........

SaskGuy

SaskGuy

Active Member
Can anyone help me out. I took this picture off the featured photos, what awesome bucks. I have to ask about that one though, please tell me that that beautiful buck with the common base point isn't a typical. If it is and I was Wayne Zaft I'd be choked. Beauty bucks though. Help anyone?????
157achery-mn-state-records.jpg
 
I believe they are the state records for bow in minnesota. Correct me if Im wrong. And yes zaft got screwed on the judging.
confused.gif
 
The common base point buck (Curt Van Lith Buck) is the current state record and Yes if I were Zaft, I'd have been pissed off myself. Curt Killed it back in the 80's...I can remember the North American Whitetail issue when it came out. One heck of a buck.
 
It is Kaare, I believe they are the Curt Van Lith and Glen Bullick bucks. I'm sure I butchered the spelling of their names though.

Chris
 
[ QUOTE ]
One heck of a buck

[/ QUOTE ]

NO KIDDING!
shocked.gif

I'm not knocking that buck at all, beautiful. Just wondering about P & Y more all the time???
confused.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
Whats the story here guys? Sorry for not knowing!!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm with Buck. Help us out a little.
 
The common base rule is used in both B&C and P&Y.

I haven't seen either buck in person so don't have much to say about how each was measured, but I do know the common-base rule well and have had several judgment calls when measuring bucks that this rule pertains to.

Basically, the common base rule has nothing to do with the way a buck "looks" in a photograph. It is a rule that tries to destinguish between two normal points that have a "web" between them and two points - one that is normal coming off main beam and the abnormal that splits off the normal point. In all actuality, two points can be joined all the way up to the tips and still be concidered two normal points if they fit the rule right. The only way to truely fix this rule is to cut off the points at the base line where they intersect the main beam and see if there are seperate vains coming up off the main beam or to see if one comes off the main beam and then the other off that.

The zaft buck was measured seperately and looked at by a different panel than the VanLith buck... did zaft get hosed? I can't say cause I haven't seen the buck in person - but one thing P&Y cannot do when measuring a buck like his is say "well, gease - it looks more typical than this one that was scored this way"

BTW - I think Zaft's buck is much more impressive to look at but I can see through the photographs I've seen that it was a judgement call and I'm sure a close one.
 
The buck is a controversal one for sure. Regardless of the outcome, I could see Pro's and Con's from each side. The buck looks so "typical", except for 2 "typical" points being so close together, making it non-typical.

In my opinion, the webbed mass measurement is deducted anyways, when scored as a typical. So the larger mass doesn't help the typical score higher, so why not allow it? If there is a problem, I don't think the problem lies in the panel of scorers, but in the P&Y scoring system itself.

I haven't seem it in real life either, so it's hard to tell, in just pictures.
 
What actually happened was the Curt Van Lith buck was scored before the common base/point rule was in place. It was applied shortly after, therefore the Zaft buck was shot after the rule was in place. Hopefully that makes sense, and clears some things up.
 
Zaft did not get the shaft. I held the rack in my hands at Panel in Madison Wisconsin. While we all want to see a new WR, it is not. the rules are clear and the definition all other deer have been measured against for common base points made it clear that it did not meet the crietrial for 2 normal points. Sorry, I wish I myself could say I was part of a NWR, but folks, it is not. great buck indeed but you cant change the rules. Regardless of score, let me memory of your hunt be the factor you take with you from season to season, not the score. I hear that if the VanLith buck was to be re-measured, it would drop under the current definition, but that wont happen.
 
Van Lith buck... scored as two typical points because there is an "hour-glass" shape, or, on both sides (inside and outside of the beam) when you hold a strait edge across the points where they meet the beam, there is daylight on both sides. This has been the definition of a point since before I began measuring back in the 80's. Hasn't changed yet. A friend of mine has a replica of van Lith and he says there is definitely an hour glass and daylight on both sides at the beam.

Zaft..., not even common base. Was decided by panel that the point actually grew OUT of the other points base. What many people do not realize is that within two days of this deer being measured in Canada, the measurers themselves (the Canadian measurers involved) were saying that 204(?) would never hold up. One of these calls was made to Dave Boland, another to Glenn Hisey. In other words, they knew the point would be tossed out. Why did they do it then? Because the high entry score would enable it to be called to panel and a group of measurers could make the call. Same exact thing happened Alberta's Kolbertein buck. Randy Bean had to inflate the entry score to get it to panel because some of the measuring calls that needed to be made should have had more then one persons opinion involved.

The scoring system worked fairly for both deer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom