B&C vs. SCI

2

2sneekee

Guest
What are everyone?s thoughts on the two scoring systems?


190 All Time, 180 Award (Typical) & 230 All Time 215 Award (Non Typical)

B&C

Vs.

SCI

Rocky Mountain Mule Deer (non-typical)
Gold Score 212 4/8
Rocky Mountain Mule Deer (typical)
Gold Score 178 6/8
Desert Mule Deer (non-typica)
Gold Score 206
Desert Mule Deer (typical)
Gold Score 181 7/8
 
I'll have to agree with d13er on that one, i don't like the fenced stuff being allowed in any books....except a comic book.








48288e6577d023b6.jpg
 
Granted you do have (estate) Caged animals scoring with SCI and (non-estate) Wild Animals to with SCI
Jim Shockey vs. Doyle Moss???
 
B&C saved the wildlife and hunting way back in the day, they will be the one with the most recognition, but I see no difference in either one both are just a book you can hope to kill an animal that would be eligible for. I would love to kill an animal one day that is eligible for the book but as far as putting one in the book, I dont think I ever would just because I dont see its really anything to brag about, Face it you were just blessed to kill a big animal.
 
Anything average or better makes SCI, big deal.

Making the B&C awards book takes quite an animal, the all time takes an incredible animal.

Apples and oranges
 
B&C OM....attend a 5 day workshop by invitation only

SCI OM....be able to fog a mirror
 
but with all it's warts.....SCI does as much or more to defend hunting rights and traditions than any hunter organization.

JB
 
The Boone & Crockett "Awards" catagory has made it a lot easier to put bucks in the Book. I even have a couple that would make that book. They wouldn't come close when the Min. was 195. not sure but i think they (B&C club) are trying to generate interset and therefore money by lowering their Minimum scores this far.

180 is a great buck, but Record Book quality? i think not. I have always been a Boone and Crockett guy but like to talk horns in term of gross score unless it's been officially scored as a "book" animal.

Joey
 
"B&C OM....attend a 5 day workshop by invitation only

SCI OM....be able to fog a mirror"

:) Now that's funny JB!

Personally, I prefer the B&C / P&Y system and their guidelines over SCI.



BOHNTR )))---------->
 
As an OM for B&C and P&Y I would agree with d13r's posts.

For me personally it boils down to the concept of fair chase. I don't mean to take away from animals recorded by SCI, but free-roaming animals that resulted from natural life cycles compared against animals bred and raised in high-fenced properties (no matter how large) makes no sense.
 
B&C, I am not an elitist but is fair chase or nothing. I don't want to see or score bucks that are bred, kept behind high fences and have ear tags. That is what the difference is to me, plain and simple. I don't want to go out and pay to shoot old number 7 just to put my name in SCI. That type of hunting in my mind is associated with money and corruption of the hunting sport. I will give SCI credit for protecing hunting rights though.

Rich
 
You guys are comparing the organizations..

Both do ALOT for fighting for all of our rights to hunt..


But as far as scoring is concerned, I think B&C sucks.. I think a deer/elk/goat/sheep should get credit for every inch of bone grown on his record class set of antlers or horns. This whole symmetry crap is for the birds.. Male ungulates fight, break points,tips, wear down horns, etc and then the system penalizes the animal for not being exact on both sides.
Deer grow kickers and stickers and drops and off-lines and this and that... and then they end up actually DECREASING the deer's score?? That makes no sense to me, whatsoever.
B&C scoring is the standard to which 99% of all of us use to field judge an animal and to speak of a great animal that has been taken, and its a good system in which to speak of an animal or field judge an animal, but it has it's flaws in my opinion..

But then again, as they say, opinions are like.......
 
I always thought the deduction system in B&C was developed by a guy who killed a very symetrical mid 190's typical and was winning a big buck contest, until his neighbor killed a 210 buck with trash. Probebly not the case, but kind of a funny way to look at it. I've heard it said before, nets are for fish.
 
I agree with Topper and Scottyboy. I prefer SCI or the Buckmasters scoring system. I could care less what the minimums are to enter a critter. I have no intention of paying someone to get my name on a list. It's more for hunter ego than credit to the animal's size anyway. Count everything it has not just symmetry.
 
I am a Ontario Canada measurer. We use the B&C system. I have measured some nice buck that measure 160-170(whitetails) and get hit hard with 10"-12" of deductions. That kind of stinks, but what do you do. I heard B&C are now going to put the gross scores in the book as well. That would give the deer a little more respect when it comes to scoring. SCI measure every inch of antler or horn with no deductions. Too each their own.
I am a member of SCI, but I don't agree with them allowing non-fair chase animal in.
SCI is the largest hunting organization in the world. They do a ton of thing towards hunters and their rights. You have to respect them for that.

Bake
 
i think that mass doesnt get enough attention. do a displacement score and mass would be more of a factor.
 
>but with all it's warts.....SCI does
>as much or more to
>defend hunting rights and traditions
>than any hunter organization.


THAT is exactly why I am a member of SCI.

Scott
Member: RMEF, SCI, and NRA
 
I agree with the #5 post. But we are all still one group fighting to keep our sport and god given rights!
 
I say.....who the HELL cares!

The worst question we have in hunting right now is....."what did he score?"

I think "score" should be the last question!!! I think if a hunter is happy, and he had a good hunt, and killed the animal that he wanted to kill.....then who the F cares what the stupid thing scores!!!! I am getting tired of the SCORE!!!! It has RUINED hunting and turned it into a BIG MONEY sport that most will be pushed out of IMO!!

Now what I think is REALLY important right now is what we are doing to defend out sport from the "antis"!!!! I think both organizations are doing the correct thing in making sure that we are able to do this.

IMO SCI is going and and spending the most time, money and energy to make sure Hunters rights are defended. I think that is HUGE!!!

Who cares if a animal makes a "book"! If you are happy with the size and the HUNT of that animal that you have taken....then that is all that should matter!!!!

Whewwwww, I better climb down off my High Horse before I fall off!!! hehehehehehe
 
The B&C system wasn't actually created for hunters , it was created more to make records of animals that were expected to or feared might to go extinct, samples of species perfection were the goal not a pat on the back. over the years it's been tweeked and adapted more for our use today, but aren't we all glad it's now used for hunters and not historians .

The awards book I think is a great thing, even getting an animal in there isn't that easy for most species and it give hunters something within reach to go for. Sage if a 180 net buck isn't a record book quality deer where you come from I'll trade you our hunting here in Oregon for your area anytime.

Even though I'm a B&C O/M I think the value of the scoring system is more in knowing what quality of animal you're looking at than any recognition or glory in it. just saying " 30 inch buck " doesn't mean crap, saying 180 B&C tells me everything.
 
>I say.....who the HELL cares!
>
>The worst question we have in
>hunting right now is....."what did
>he score?"
>
>I think "score" should be the
>last question!!! I think if
>a hunter is happy, and
>he had a good hunt,
>and killed the animal that
>he wanted to kill.....then who
>the F cares what the
>stupid thing scores!!!! I am
>getting tired of the SCORE!!!!
>It has RUINED hunting and
>turned it into a BIG
>MONEY sport that most will
>be pushed out of IMO!!
>
>
>Now what I think is REALLY
>important right now is what
>we are doing to defend
>out sport from the "antis"!!!!
>I think both organizations are
>doing the correct thing in
>making sure that we are
>able to do this.
>
>IMO SCI is going and and
>spending the most time, money
>and energy to make sure
>Hunters rights are defended. I
>think that is HUGE!!!
>
>Who cares if a animal makes
>a "book"! If you are
>happy with the size and
>the HUNT of that animal
>that you have taken....then that
>is all that should matter!!!!
>
>
>Whewwwww, I better climb down off
>my High Horse before I
>fall off!!! hehehehehehe




That's what they all say til they actually kill one that'll book....

JB
 
Kind of like how I never wanted to date a super model , they're just too much trouble.
 
I don't care much for the inches game. I like BC because their fair chase, but their moose scoring system is ridiculous.

-------------------------
www.sagebasin.com
-------------------------
 
I like the fact that Boone and Crockett stands for fair chase dont really care about net scores more for the gross score.

But for me I would say B&C all the way.


THE LORD IS MY ROCK
COLORADO,USA
NRA LIFE MEMBER
HUNTING PASS IT ON
 
What's wrong with B&C's moose system? I kind of wish there was some credit for point length in some way, but I understand it since palmation is what's desired.

Look at SCI's moose system, why double the palm measurements? that makes no sense to me.
 
I think both clubs have there pros and cons but I believe by lowering the minimums and having a Bronze and Silver award SCI is able to generate lots of more revenue and that way they are able to help more finanically every year. Also you have to give some credit to SCI for breaking down the species alittle better and also for taking on all animals that are legally harvested around the world. I think its great and as I get older and start hunting abroad a little more SCI's system is what the rest of the world is using. I am very glad they also seperate high fence animals versus free range. Every species and every weapon. Its a great organization that I think really has the future of the sport in mind a little more than B&C.
 
>I think both clubs have there
>pros and cons but I
>believe by lowering the minimums
>and having a Bronze and
>Silver award SCI is able
>to generate lots of more
>revenue and that way they
>are able to help more
>finanically every year. Also you
>have to give some credit
>to SCI for breaking down
>the species alittle better and
>also for taking on all
>animals that are legally harvested
>around the world. I think
>its great and as I
>get older and start hunting
>abroad a little more SCI's
>system is what the rest
>of the world is using.
>I am very glad they
>also seperate high fence animals
>versus free range. Every species
>and every weapon. Its a
>great organization that I think
>really has the future of
>the sport in mind a
>little more than B&C.

Great post!!! +1 on everything you said
 
B&C all the way. However, it would be nice if B&C included a gross score along with the net.
 
All good posts. From my observations, BnC & P&Y uses non-metal measuring tape, SCI uses metal measuring tape, which adds to the score. I have seen and talked to others that alot of SCI scorers do not know how to measurer properly, such as Antelope.
I support SCI, as I'm a member, but will not become an OM. I am a BnC and P&Y OM.
 
I prefer every inch of growth to be counted, but don't agree with the SCI rules allowing farmed animals.

Either way neither will score the massive cow I'm going to kill with this CO tag. I'm going to start my own scoring system for females. The bigger the teats the higher the score. I guess a symmetrical udder will be worth a little more under the BC line of scoring teats.
 
>All good posts. From my observations,
>BnC & P&Y uses non-metal
>measuring tape, SCI uses metal
>measuring tape, which adds to
>the score. I have seen
>and talked to others that
>alot of SCI scorers do
>not know how to measurer
>properly, such as Antelope.
>I support SCI, as I'm a
>member, but will not become
>an OM. I am a
>BnC and P&Y OM.


I find it hard to believe that you are a B&C OM and don't know that the only tape measure allowed is a 1/4" metal tape. Try fooling the fans, not the players.

JB
 
I wish they would use total surface area by using a tub of water and seeing the true "size" of the antlers if you want to be critical. Anyway I do not agree with having fenced animals recorded.
 

Similar threads


Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom