Another outstanding bull Zeke. You folks know how to find and kill big bulls. I suspect you invest a great deal of time and effort doing what you love, and it always shows. Years of accumulated knowledge and commitment will do that for a family!!!
Thanks for sharing, again.
Shadow, Berry is right, and he probably sees and tapes more bulls than about anyone on this post, so if anyone has a knowledgeable perspective, it's Berry. IMO. I agree with you both, sometimes it's hard to tell, especially in the field, when all hell is coming down and a decision to shot or not shot is at hand.
There are some elk, deer or moose, in the field, that when you see them, there is no doubt, shot and you won't be disappointed. Others, nope, no need to even look twice, just simply not there. And then there are others, like the video posted on the first, thread about estimated elk scores, and the young bull i posted, you can look and look and look, and you still don't know. I think the young bull might be one of those. At least it is for me.
When I look at this last bull Zeke posted, I see "mass" and his nice long 1, 2 and 3 tines. I see good beam length between the 2 and 3 points and good beam length between between the 3rd and 4ths, but there not a lot of main beam left after his 5ths, so then I wonder, is he 52 or 57 inch long? His 5th and 6th points are nice but certainly not really long, like some bulls are back there.
I can't tell how wide he is, but he's certainly not narrow. But is he 46" or 50" wide. I think closer to 50" but that's just a guess, from that angle. And some times, in the field, thats the only angle you get to see.
Sometimes, the length of a bulls tines and main beams, make the mass look less than it is. Sometimes, they are just so fricking massive, no amount of length will change how how massive they look. This bull of Zeke has both mass and tine length, on the bottom half, but he score 380+ so he's dang sure good enough on the top to keep his score up, approaching that magical 400".
I remember seeing the number 2 in Colorado, typical 4 x4 mule deer, at a taxidermy shop, a few years ago. I think he measured around 216" but that might be wrong. Anyway, he was mounted on a floor pedestal and I walk by him and commented, "that's a nice looking buck". The taxidermist chuckled. He told how much he scored, I said, "Wow, his tines are long but he's not that heavy". He said, "take this tape and measure the bases of his main beams". They were well over 6", but the length made them look small, even at close proximity.
I took a good looking bull that we got in New Mexico into that same taxidermy shop, and asked the taxidermist (a well know gentleman, that has mounted literally hundreds of monster bull elk) to see what he came up with for a score. He eye balled the bull for a second and said, "that's a dandy, I'd say over 375" but lets measure him up". Turns out, he went 348" (as I recall). Funny how the tape is the only way you can know for sure.
But, I've always said this, and still do, and I know we are all different. I really don't care what they score, character, symmetry, mass, tine length, width, height, are all more interesting than inches. Truth is, when it comes to mass, a monster massive, prehistoric mass, doesn't add that much to the over all score, when all the other measurements are tallied. I think, if you want to give the animal full credit for his antler growth, we should be taking into account the mass measurement of all the tines, as well as the main beam, but what the hell, a standard is a standard. Prentiss Gray created the standard for the Boone and Crockett Club and that's primarily what we use to compare, one to another. If I were doing it, I'd use a different standard but if we all had our own standard, there would be not standard. There'd be no way to compare, so I'm good to stay with what we generally use, B&C, but that doesn't mean I care in the least what an animal scores, if I like it, that's all that matters to me. But if we want to compare, we need a system that does that, in one way or another, and I don't have a problem if folks like to compare. Comparisons are different from personal likes and dislikes.
Beside, when the rubber meets the road, the antlers are just a small part of it, right. If we just wanted nice antlers, we could have someone build some out of plaster for us. It the whole package. It the preparation, it's the outdoor environment, is the smells, the colors, the geography, the dry, the wet, the rain, the snow, the flora, the fauna, the woodsmanship, the companionship, the isolation, the dirt, the wind, the smoke, the campfires, the the scouting, the locating, the stocking, the shooting, the meat, the, the, the.......... not just the antlers. The antlers just represent a much larger experience and lifestyle. That's why we must keep the flame burning. Not just because we eat the meat, but because of all that goes into the lifestyle. it's where we came from as humans, as explorers, as seekers, as builders, as a species that accumulates knowledge and grows skills, it's how humans become humans. We need to make sure that we never loose our foundation and our beginnings because it's that inbreed lifestyle that is going to take humans successfully into solving their adventures in the future, be they on the Earth, in science labs, or small garages in Silicone Valley or on some other planet in some far off corner of the universe.
Sorry, got a little carried away there.