wow. great buck!

Beauts in the forks.  We needed those fronts on 8 deer we put in the spotting scope!

Fun hunting them, hardest darn deer to hunt if you are looking for a certain something in score and appearance.

hell of a nice deer. Very nice picture too. good job buddy

Very nice!

Thats why big mule deer are tuff to come by.  They need 4 things and few have all four.  Nice looking buck.  The weather on it's way might help you out wswat good luck.

great buck

  Very nice indeed.

Thats a dandy, good work!

 nice work.

Tim Sandstrom Said:
Fun hunting them, hardest darn deer to hunt if you are looking for a certain something in score and appearance.

You make it sound like the big whitetails we are looking for are just over the next hill.

I like this buck nice deer.

PASS!!

Derrik and WSWAT hunted their tails off and are both very deserving of this buck.  I am happy to have been part of such a fun hunt with good friends.  Congrats fellas!

Great deer!

show the picture of this deer straight on it isn't as flattering but still pretty damn cool looking.

reddog Said:

Tim Sandstrom Said:
Fun hunting them, hardest darn deer to hunt if you are looking for a certain something in score and appearance.

You make it sound like the big whitetails we are looking for are just over the next hill.

I like this buck nice deer.

It is so much easier to get a good scoring whitetail than it is a mule deer.  You can have a whitetail with a 6 x 4 frame and have it score properly.  Point is, even if a mule deer is large in "frame" it doesn't mean it will score worth a darn.  You get a good framed whitetail and it almost always will score pretty good regardless of how many tines, etc.

Getting a big, big deer is always challenging but it really is more difficult to get a 170 inch muledeer than it is to get a 150 to 170 whitetail.  The room for "error" is so much less for a whitetail.

Interesting theory.  Maybe somebody should go through a years worth of pics on here (dead deer) and see if that stands true.  170 against 150.  Granted gonna have to go percentage as there is probably more whitetails.

Hardscrabble Said:
PASS!!

Derrik and WSWAT hunted their tails off and are both very deserving of this buck.  I am happy to have been part of such a fun hunt with good friends.  Congrats fellas!

PASS!
Ya thats funny guess I won't live that one down.

did you guys put a tape to him yet?

 

Tim Sandstrom Said:

reddog Said:

Tim Sandstrom Said:
Fun hunting them, hardest darn deer to hunt if you are looking for a certain something in score and appearance.

You make it sound like the big whitetails we are looking for are just over the next hill.

I like this buck nice deer.

It is so much easier to get a good scoring whitetail than it is a mule deer.  You can have a whitetail with a 6 x 4 frame and have it score properly.  Point is, even if a mule deer is large in "frame" it doesn't mean it will score worth a darn.  You get a good framed whitetail and it almost always will score pretty good regardless of how many tines, etc.

Getting a big, big deer is always challenging but it really is more difficult to get a 170 inch muledeer than it is to get a 150 to 170 whitetail.  The room for "error" is so much less for a whitetail.

Going to have to politely disagree with that statement Tim! lol... seeing pictures posted, I see many more muleys that score better than whitetails. Also going to the buck contests in Beulah, by far more larger mule deer when compared to the whitetails. Last year at the beulah contest the average whitetail was near.... something like 150, and the muleys were near the mid 160's.... cant remember the exact numbers though. LIke you said though, shooting a mature buck is super tough in itself !! I would venture to bet there are twice as many mule deer with scores in the 170's, compared to whitetails scoring in the 170's.

sweeney Said:
did you guys put a tape to him yet?

taylorman_55 Said:
 

Tim Sandstrom Said:

reddog Said:

Tim Sandstrom Said:
Fun hunting them, hardest darn deer to hunt if you are looking for a certain something in score and appearance.

You make it sound like the big whitetails we are looking for are just over the next hill.

I like this buck nice deer.

It is so much easier to get a good scoring whitetail than it is a mule deer.  You can have a whitetail with a 6 x 4 frame and have it score properly.  Point is, even if a mule deer is large in "frame" it doesn't mean it will score worth a darn.  You get a good framed whitetail and it almost always will score pretty good regardless of how many tines, etc.

Getting a big, big deer is always challenging but it really is more difficult to get a 170 inch muledeer than it is to get a 150 to 170 whitetail.  The room for "error" is so much less for a whitetail.

Going to have to politely disagree with that statement Tim! lol... seeing pictures posted, I see many more muleys that score better than whitetails. Also going to the buck contests in Beulah, by far more larger mule deer when compared to the whitetails. Last year at the beulah contest the average whitetail was near.... something like 150, and the muleys were near the mid 160's.... cant remember the exact numbers though. LIke you said though, shooting a mature buck is super tough in itself !! I would venture to bet there are twice as many mule deer with scores in the 170's, compared to whitetails scoring in the 170's.

Taylorman,

I think you don't quite understand what Tim is saying. When it comes down to trophy size most people compair Whitetail to Muleys with what it takes to get into Boone and Crockett.

So since it is 190 for Muleys and 170 for Whitetails you can say that a 170 muley is compairable to a 150 Whitetail the 20" rule.

When looking at the record books you are way more likely to shoot a 150 whitetail then a 170 Muley in your life.
Mostly being their is way more Whitetailsand you end up having more tags for the most part also.

As a whole it would be hard to but a number on the ratio of whitetail bucks over 150 to those that are smaller. And a Muley over 170 and those that are smaller.

But from my hunting experience I know I'm going to see at least 1 whitetail a year over 150". While Muledeer I can't say the same.

Hope this makes any sense.

haha yeah, I did mis understand it. I thought we were comparing 170 inch whitetails, to 170 inch mule deer. Didnt figure in the 20" trophy status figure for books. Without question, for tag numbers being a big part of it, yes a 150 whitey is more likely than a 170 inch mule deer.

WSWAT Said:

sweeney Said:
did you guys put a tape to him yet?

taylorman_55 Said:
 

Tim Sandstrom Said:

reddog Said:

Tim Sandstrom Said:
Fun hunting them, hardest darn deer to hunt if you are looking for a certain something in score and appearance.

You make it sound like the big whitetails we are looking for are just over the next hill.

I like this buck nice deer.

It is so much easier to get a good scoring whitetail than it is a mule deer.  You can have a whitetail with a 6 x 4 frame and have it score properly.  Point is, even if a mule deer is large in "frame" it doesn't mean it will score worth a darn.  You get a good framed whitetail and it almost always will score pretty good regardless of how many tines, etc.

Getting a big, big deer is always challenging but it really is more difficult to get a 170 inch muledeer than it is to get a 150 to 170 whitetail.  The room for "error" is so much less for a whitetail.

Going to have to politely disagree with that statement Tim! lol... seeing pictures posted, I see many more muleys that score better than whitetails. Also going to the buck contests in Beulah, by far more larger mule deer when compared to the whitetails. Last year at the beulah contest the average whitetail was near.... something like 150, and the muleys were near the mid 160's.... cant remember the exact numbers though. LIke you said though, shooting a mature buck is super tough in itself !! I would venture to bet there are twice as many mule deer with scores in the 170's, compared to whitetails scoring in the 170's.

Taylorman,

I think you don't quite understand what Tim is saying. When it comes down to trophy size most people compair Whitetail to Muleys with what it takes to get into Boone and Crockett.

So since it is 190 for Muleys and 170 for Whitetails you can say that a 170 muley is compairable to a 150 Whitetail the 20" rule.

When looking at the record books you are way more likely to shoot a 150 whitetail then a 170 Muley in your life.
Mostly being their is way more Whitetailsand you end up having more tags for the most part also.

As a whole it would be hard to but a number on the ratio of whitetail bucks over 150 to those that are smaller. And a Muley over 170 and those that are smaller.

But from my hunting experience I know I'm going to see at least 1 whitetail a year over 150". While Muledeer I can't say the same.

Hope this makes any sense.

Its not just the 150 versus 170, to me that is a whole different discussion and a good one at that as I think it is true related to the books and just big deer in general.  It takes a lot more physical hunting for a good muledeer because they live in much more rugged country and demand entirely different type of hunting.  But like I said, that is a whole different ball game.

What is most prevelant to my point is the make up of the horns.  For a mule deer to score it ABSOLUTELY MUST have uniform horns in their G2, G3, G4 and main beam (especially the mainbeam).

You cannot have a mule deer with a dagger (no fork) or little fork for its G2/G3 combo and have an awesome G2/G3 on the other side and expect a good overall score.  Likewise for the front forks.  The mule deer is way more critical in getting EVERYTHING in its horn makeup.

Whereas, a whitetail you have much more room for error.  For example, a muledeer's score is based 65% on its front forks.  That's right, 65%.  You do not have that handicap with a whitetail.

Does that make more sense?

how do you get 65 %?

I don't know, that's what Mike Eastman says.

I will have to try and dig up the book.  Maybe I am quoting it wrong.

Still it doesn't negate the point I don't think.  A mule deer to score unless it has freakish attributes must be consistent in its frame.

Or maybe it is easier to say this.  Think of a mule deer as a 4 point whitetail.  Unless a four point whitetails has it all in tine length, mass and mainbeams it won't score very good even if it looks impressive.  But a whitetails that looks somewhat bad but has more tines than a 4 point it will score good.

So really, tell me how many 140 class four points get shot.  Some.  Tell me how many 150 four points get shot.  Very few.  160's very very few.  Same thing with a mule deer.  You only get four tines (brows are really insignificant in the grand scheme) to get a quality score.

Tim,
The "front end" is made up of the G-4's, main beam length, & inside spread of the main beam.

Example: take a good scoring deer, say 160".  Main beams are 22", inside spread is 22", G-4's are 10".  That is a total of 86" worth of the score.  Little off of the 65% but I believe that is the jist of it.

yeah thats what i was wondering but if they are going to count the main beam and spread to get that 65% they mine as well count 3 of the 4 circs and say that it is worth 85%. anyways i see what they mean by 65 now

Tim,
Great points. Mule deer need to have both good front forks and good back forks. You will often find crab-claw forks on one or another and it kills the score. Also don't get too caught up on the inside spread. Although a buck looks great with a wide spread, it only accounts for about 15% of the overal score.
i know of a true 30" buck taken this year and I'll bet it won't score over 140".

Wayne

Forgot to mention, that is a nice buck it the photo. Congrats!

Wayne