Ohio 320 Non-Typical

[swamp]

Has anyone got more info on this?

http://www.boone-crockett.com/news/trophyWatch.asp?area=news#watchBE8CEA8F-21DD-46F6-BBF1-6FFB01EEB9C6

[ncboman]

I quickly scanned the Ohio site and no mention of it did I see. :confused:

[swamp]

geeze its really not that big...

http://www.bowhunting.com/blog/post/2009/11/03/Ohios-Real-320-Buck-could-become-the-Largest-Non-Typical-ever-Taken-by-Hunter!.aspx

[swamp]

.... not that big

[swamp]

ttt

[ncboman]

ttt

assuming you want discussion? ... ok

If that buck was killed with an xbow, he rates just above a roadkill. ... maybe. :rolleyes:

[swamp]

most likely one of the largest deer if not the largest deer ever taken by a hunter....

[ncboman]

that hunter/pic looks familiar but I don't recall from where.

[swamp]

Although its got some non-typical points, i'd like to know the typical score on that thing... could be a new worlds record typical... that thing is a giant...

[Bushman]

It is hard for me to believe that we would ever have been talking about a typical set of whitetail antlers that scored over 300". I can't say that I really like the shape of those antlers representing the new possible world record, but then I don't like the thinness of the current world record Hanson Buck either. I like antlers with a more conventional shape like the MN. State record John Breen Buck. It would be good to get the world record back in the states though.

[swamp]

i think the typical score would be in the 210 range but can't really see the details of the rack in the photo...

[Rick Teal]

That picture makes it very difficult tl guesstimate a score.

There appear to be more typical points on the right antler than the left which would not be counted whether it were typical or non-typical. I can't see a lot of junk on the rack, so it doesn't seem that it would be that exceptional as a NT. I can't see it even grossing anything like 300 as an NT or netting 200 as a typical. Its an impressive rack, but it would be lucky to make the book.

As to the Breen buck, it's a magnificent animal, but its very non-typical in nature, and I personally prefer clean typical racks like the Hanson and Jordan bucks.

[swamp]

its really hard to judge the rack of the ohio buck... from that pic

i dont see the breen buck as being non-typical... dont know what are seeing besides a few stickers on it

[ncboman]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v50/ncboman/vivitar_pics_1_002.jpg

[swamp]

yep that breen buck is definitely a non typical .... LOL

not a bad line up...

[ncboman]

some more

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v50/ncboman/vivitar_pics_1_001.jpg

[ncboman]

my favorite;

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v50/ncboman/Petry_Buck.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v50/ncboman/enhancedPetryBuck.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v50/ncboman/vivitarpics1003.jpg

Notice the G2s are the longest tines. As close to perfection as it gets at 200". I know of no other buck scoring over 190 that has G2s as the longest tines. The pics don't really do it justice as the upsweep and the ends of the main beams is breathtaking.

While the Breen buck (my 2nd favorite) is just a little bigger, the Petry buck stands at the top in both symetry and what most trophy hunters consider a very desirable truely typical frame.

My best friend likes the Breen buck best. He always asks, 'if both of em were side by side, which would you shoot?' :rolleyes:

[ncboman]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v50/ncboman/enhancedPetryBuck.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v50/ncboman/vivitar_pics_1_002.jpg

http://www.huntamerica.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=314&d=1259045731

Lot of bone. :cool:

[Rick Teal]

That larger version of the picture shows me additional points - both typical and abnormal - that I didn't see before, so I have to temper my original statements that the buck is an unlikely qualifier. It likely makes it as a non-typical unless there's something unusual that one shot doesn't show.

It's always hard to get a reference point in a photograph to establish the true size of a trophy - especially when the rack is held out in front of the "hero" and the picture is taken with a small lens. The distance between the bases ius usually about 4 inches with some bigger bucks going about 5". In some rare examples this is even greater, but this make guesstimating very difficult.

That shot of the Breen buck does de-emphasize the abnormal points, but other shots I've seen show them to their full extent. I had hoped to see a repliuca of that rack last spring at the Bass Pro event in Toronto, but it wasn't there. Maybe this spring. Seeing the actual rack might lead me to change my opinion, but for now, I'm standing by my guns.

[swamp]

a few stickers on the breen buck doesnt make him appear to be a non-typical... I've seen a replica of the breen and it is most impressive...

I am curious to find out more about the ohio 320 buck...

NC... thanks for showing us your personal collection of original antlers...

[Bushman]

I just don't see enough non-symmetrical on that rack to score it as a non-typical. That drop tine and the split G-3 on the left antler certainly. If it is 6 on the right and only 5 on the left, that would sure hurt it's net typical score. I can't tell if there is another point out on the end of the left antler or if that is an antler point sticking off to the far right in the photo, but it looks like a ghost image because you can see the tree behind it through it. I'm not sure they would count that second from the end point on the right antler as a point either as it might be wider than it is high. Those stickers below the left brow tine would not take off much either if he has 320" to work with. His choice if he wants it scored as a typical or a non-typical, but scored as a non-typical there are some real monstrous racks to go up against.

[venado]

By my WAG, I get 215 gross, 210 NT and 170 Typ. It will be interesting to see what the real measurements yield but 300 under any system appears way out of reach to me.

[swamp]

By my WAG, I get 215 gross, 210 NT and 170 Typ. It will be interesting to see what the real measurements yield but 300 under any system appears way out of reach to me.

even conservative estimates are putting this in the 260-280 NT Gross range... I don't know where you are getting your figures from..

[venado]

Swamp, the question is where are these "conservative" estimates coming from. I certainly have been wrong many times but I'll stick with my WAG unless shown better data than this picture.

My WAG is based on
Up (Rt. and Lft.):

G1 6 and 5
G2 10 and 11
G3 12 and 14
G4 12 and 12
G5 no and no
NT 13 and 8

Down
spread, mass, MBs 115

Let's see those "conservative" details.

[swamp]

what is WAG...

http://www.boone-crockett.com/bgRecords/bc_scoring_ntwhitetail.asp?area=bgRecords&type=Non%2DTypical+Whitetail+Deer

Some of the magazine writers came up with those estimates I mentioned... see the links I posted earlier...

[venado]

WAG = wild azz guess

I based the dimensions shown on my estimate on commonly used comparisons when making a WAG from a picture. The only big error I anticipate in my WAG involves the "down" and I certainly could have missed that since in a straight on picture the MBs are impossible to compare. Suppose I missed the "down" by 10" or 20", I still believe it is no where near 300.

It is an awesome buck and will certainly show up in some magazines with accurate scoring. I enjoy making estimates (WAGs) and look forward to seeing real numbers. If anyone has a better set of numbers today, or even wants to make their own WAG, let's see them. This sure will not be the first time I guessed wrong.:D