Folks,

Now I know that none of us care about scores, so this is just for fun. I think that most people believe that SCI tends to score younger bulls higher due to the tip-tip length out weighing the width of boss.

I believe that Roland Ward only measures outside spread and thus cows can score quite high.

So how would you set up a measurement scheme that would most fairly refect the actual trophy quailty?

-Steve

Miles walked. The more miles walked, the better the trophy.

Regards,

Terry

If you shot it and it goes "bang-flop" you get 10 points unless it was more than 100 yards away and then you get "0". One shot and runs off and dies within 100 yards you get 5 points. Charges and you stop the charge without PH shooting another 20 points. 1st shot at 100 yards add 1 point....at 75 yards add 3 points ----at 50 yards add 5 points...at 25 yards add 10 points ----closer than 15 yards add 25 points.

No points added for the size of the horns, only for the quality of the experience and the closer you are, the higher the quality of the experience.

Steve,

This doesn't answer your question but I will say both systems seem to be flawed by not really making any paricular allowance for a mature bull. I have no idea how to improve the current systems.

I do agree with the previous posters that a trophy is not just measured by score but also and perhaps more importantly by the quality of the experience involved in taking it.

Mark

I'd agree with Mark about the quality of the hunt being more important than the mere size in inches....... I personally think the best way to measure/rank Buff trophies would be by the water displacement method.

How's this for keeping score: Every time a buff gets a hunter, the buff gets 10 points. Every time a hunter gets a buffalo, the hunter gets one point (the handicap is because the buffalo is not allowed to use a gun). In this game, shutouts are definitely a hoped for occurrence.

Don't you just love a smart ass at Christmas time.

How about using the current measurement, but doubling the base score for every identifiable human or lion DNA profile found in the dried blood on the horns?

Put a multiplier on boss width, take out the tip to tip measurement and replace it with a depth of curl from top of boss measurement. What do you guys think? Personally I don't care for scoring in general but it would be nice if the old boys got their due.

I must agree that the CIC method of water displacement is the only apples to apples comparison which would make sense. But since politics and beauty scores have always been considered it seems overly clinical to some. JUST FAIR, so whatever method you choose, remmber the most important advice in this thread is that the experience you have is what matters. It is that memory which you will cling tightly to on your deathbed, and carry you through the tough times. You will neither remember the score, nor care then.

Bulldog has a point. Put a multiplier on boss.

In addition to this, have deductions for gaps between the horns after boiling. That

Here is how it might look.

Boss width x 3
Deduct 5x gap between hard horn after boiling

Like Steve said, this is just for fun. As others have posted. It is about the hunt, not the tape.

Terry is the only one close!!!!! Its miles and sweat.

Sprig

By the miles system the shouldn't Leopards be counted by hrs in a blind? One dosen't appreciate a Leopard until they have hrs & hrs in a blind. If you run them miles chasing one on foot, trk miles don't count.

quote:

Originally posted by T.Carr:
Miles walked. The more miles walked, the better the trophy.

Regards,

Terry

Add "days stalked" as well. Miles and days seem to go together.

From Shakari

I'd agree with Mark about the quality of the hunt being more important than the mere size in inches....... I personally think the best way to measure/rank Buff trophies would be by the water displacement method.

I am not sure about the water displacement method, but if it refers to how much I pissed in my pants at the time of the shot, then I vote for that.

From Formerflyer-

How about using the current measurement, but doubling the base score for every identifiable human or lion DNA profile found in the dried blood on the horns?

I agree that should count for something.


For me, it was a grand adventure that I will never forget. My sons were there as well. Trophy enough.

T.Carr

DB Bill:

Now THAT'S a scoring system I like! Ever since my one and only trip for buff I have been very unimpressed with shots taken at such ranges (according to what I see on TV) that it must be somewhat like shooting at a Holstein cow in a field. My buff was quite large in weight. (The PH estimated him at over 1800lbs. The horn spread was not that great -but curled in a wicked hook -that he apparently had used once on a lion - judging from the claw marks on his flanks) You are right - It's the sum total of how the buff was taken that should count - but I guess I have to be realistic because the SCI scoring committee wasn't there when the buff was taken - so they have to use certain concrete measurements. This is not sour grapes by me. My buff is in the SCI book ( 9th Ed,Africa, p.89, the name is Gerald McMorrow) If weight had been counted I think he would have ranked much higher than 178) Just my thoughts.

A bow kill would have to add ..... say...... 100 points!!!

You guys kill me!

-Steve

I would only add 100 points for a buff shot with a bow if the PH carried a bow as a back-up weapon.

Bow hunting dangerous game while the PH carries a rifle is one step above mastubaring while looking at a picture of a Slema Hyak and claiming you slept with here.

Perfect buff scoring system, No tip to tip measurement it adds to old buff scores with worn tips and detracts from young bulls with full tips. After boiling and drying time width of both bosses at widest point, circumference of both horns at halfway point, length of each horn, with points deducted for gap in boss. All figures added then halved for the score. this way the score comes more from mass than from length and width. jj