# Bull elk score guesses



## UtahMountainMan (Jul 20, 2010)

What do you guys guess this bull score?


----------



## stevedcarlson (Apr 19, 2011)

Im guessing it's between 330-340 nice bull!


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

I was kind of guessing the same thing but didn't want to pipe in yet because I suck at it


----------



## Archin (Oct 5, 2013)

Choot em!:shock:


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

Good 3rd, but really week fronts, 5th & 6.....

Wont break 320 net.


----------



## brendo (Sep 10, 2013)

I would guess around 330. he looks like a younger bull to me he has potential! Do you have a tag?? Nambaster I am pretty new to the scoring thing and I cant figure out what inlines are I have searched google to no avail could you explain to me what they are? elk and mule deer.


----------



## Nambaster (Nov 15, 2007)

Those inlines are really cool and the third reaches way out there, but only on his right side. I agree that he is a 330-340 bull.


----------



## UtahMountainMan (Jul 20, 2010)

I was guessing him at about 320 to 330. His fronts are real weak. Cool looking bull though!


----------



## fishreaper (Jan 2, 2014)

I'm thinking between medium and medium rare. Mince some garlic, bacon, and cheese and mix it into the ground meat. As far as the steaks, I'd say a solid medium, pink all the way through, grilled to your own tastes, no sauce or seasoning needed.

:mrgreen:


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

Shoot him so we find out. I get the weak fronts, but being a good symmetrical 7x7 I can't see him at less than 340". Prolly high 340's....


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

High 330 - maybe low 340s. Who cares about net! That is a good bull. I'd shoot him.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

my guess would be a 7x7.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> Good 3rd, but really week fronts, 5th & 6.....
> 
> Wont break 320 net.


Good 3rd? What elk are you viewing? Did you notice that this bull is a 7x7? Aren't you a guide?


----------



## Kevinitis (Jul 18, 2013)

Seriously? do you guys see what I see? That's 7x7 not 6x6. Im going 370 on that bull.


----------



## pheaz (Feb 11, 2011)

Mid 330 even though its a 7x7, short fronts and short beams good back though.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

who cares what he scores...

if YOU like the way he looks, give him a dirt nap dude! 7x7 do come along very often...


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

in regard of the "good third" comment, (the bulls) left side looks to be purty darn nice in this pic.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

330-ish bull. Might hit 340...but doubt it. His fronts are really weak and will hurt his score. But having the 7th on each side will help him get some back.


----------



## hunting777 (May 3, 2009)

I agree with most, short fronts. But the seventh points help and he has great thirds. I would say 347ish. Beautiful bull regardless. A trophy in anyone's book.


----------



## torowy (Jun 19, 2008)

a 7th point adds quit a bit to the score. Probably another 15 inches to this bull, so if he is a 330 class bull normally I would put him in the mid 340's. It's also hard to tell how long his mains are.


----------



## fixed blade XC-3 (Sep 11, 2007)

You guys saying 330 are high. My bull scored 332 with tiny 3rds, he's a lot bigger than that. Id say 360


----------



## UtahMountainMan (Jul 20, 2010)

This why I posted this bull, I wanted to see what you guys thought. When I first looked at him my initial gut reaction was that was a 340 or 350 class bull. Then when I looked closer I thought him to be in the 320 to 330 range. Hopefully I can get lucky enough in the next week to get my hands on him and we can settle the debate!

This is a New Mexico public land bull.


----------



## brendo (Sep 10, 2013)

Don't get me wrong it's an awesome bull! But strong 3rds don't make up for short fronts and frame size ie beam length and spread. I'm just curious as to what measurements you are getting to put him at 360 x3?


----------



## Kevinitis (Jul 18, 2013)

That length behind the 4ths is superior. I don't know of any bull on the walls of Sportsmans, or Cal ranch or Cabelas, that also displays the score, that has that kind of length on the back and scores lower than 350. Look at how long tine 5 and 7 are. Then you add those seveth points. Thats why I go higher than 350 on this boy.


----------



## MWScott72 (May 23, 2011)

For a bull to get up into the 370 mark, pretty much all of the tines need to look "long" and his brow and 2nds are short with negligible curl (which adds length). His left G3 is good but the right G3 is short. His 4ths and 5ths are good, but if anything his 6ths and 7ths are adding back what he lost in front. Maybe, I'm wrong - I don't purport to be a great field judge, but a 370 needs to look like he has it all, and with the weak fronts, this guy isn't at that level. But again, I'd shoot him in an instant given the chance!


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

fixed blade XC-3 said:


> You guys saying 330 are high. My bull scored 332 with tiny 3rds, he's a lot bigger than that. Id say 360


Blade, your 6x6 is bigger, and scores better than this 7x7,,,,,,,

This 7x7 has a bunch of deductions.....Short inside spred too.


----------



## berrysblaster (Nov 27, 2013)

This bull is a perfect example of why some guys see 360" bulls off the road all the time....probably a mid to upper thirties bull maybe low 40's.

When I put him together it comes out like this.

Beams: 52x2
Mass: 54
Spread: 39
G1: 13,13
G2: 12,12
G3: 9,17
G4: 17,17
G5: 12,12
G6: 5,5

This gets me to 341 and I think I was a bit generous on the swords. Great bull, absolutely a wonderful trophy for 99% of hunters but it takes a butt ton of antler to get north of 350


----------



## Truelife (Feb 6, 2009)

Berry, I just can't wait to see how many guys get after you for not adding the 7th point on each side to that score. I can't tell you how many times I've scored elk for guys that ask me why I didn't add that in. They always have a funny look on their face when you ask them about the main beam measurement. 

I agree he's in the 340 range. GROSS. It's way to hard to get a tag to worry about Net anymore Goofy. Just my opinion


----------



## fixed blade XC-3 (Sep 11, 2007)

My 332 score was gross, i forgot what he net'd because that made him sound smaller. Haha


----------



## fixed blade XC-3 (Sep 11, 2007)

Berryblaster you forgot to add 2 for the extra points, and the 12" for the g7's


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

I'm in the group that sees 340-350" on that bull. Pretty bull for sure.

G-7's? Either guys are forgetting that the main beam measures the 'last point' on the antler or I'm missing where he's an 8x8... And berry, there are definitely places on the wasatch, beaver, La sal, and manti units where finding 360 bulls from the road is very doable.


----------



## fixed blade XC-3 (Sep 11, 2007)

Youre right, my bad


----------



## muleymadness (Jan 23, 2008)

320-330


----------



## Skally (Apr 20, 2012)

Who cares about the score? if he looks big enough when you have weapon in hand you shoot him, i he doesnt look big enough you dont... simple as that


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

Skally said:


> Who cares about the score? if he looks big enough when you have weapon in hand you shoot him, i he doesnt look big enough you dont... simple as that


I'm guessing he does or he wouldn't have asked.
I'm thinking 320-330 but I tend to over guess on elk and under guess on deer.:-?


----------



## berrysblaster (Nov 27, 2013)

Truelife said:


> Berry, I just can't wait to see how many guys get after you for not adding the 7th point on each side to that score. I can't tell you how many times I've scored elk for guys that ask me why I didn't add that in. They always have a funny look on their face when you ask them about the main beam measurement.
> 
> I agree he's in the 340 range. GROSS. It's way to hard to get a tag to worry about Net anymore Goofy. Just my opinion


I'm guilty of adding a measurement in haha was quickly corrected!

Johnny, I don't doubt that, but some guys say they do it every time they are out...anyone who spends time out knows better. A guy can get lucky and walk into the right canyon at the right time, but every time??? Come on nobody is that good


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

Berry, that's true. I'll find bulls 90% of the time (not just from the road!) But a great bull only about 50% of the time. Elk hunting in Utah is just awesome right now!


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

I find great bulls almost every time I look for them....what the hell is a great bull anyways? This B&C crap is ruining hunting...


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

what a spoiled bunch of hunters we have become. 

I remember when a 330 bull was a great trophy in anyone's book. Hunting is becoming a sad sport.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

I also think its a 330-340 bull. Id shoot it on any hunt in utah and be happy


----------



## brendo (Sep 10, 2013)

Seriously? Who has not said that is a trophy bull that they would shoot given the chance! I agree we are spoiled because utah has done a great job with our elk herds and there are plenty of 330+ bulls to be had. Sure I am a young hunter that enjoys looking at animals and guessing score. I also have a deep passion and respect for the outdoors and the wildlife it holds. I think most people are in the same boat score is on the bottom of the list. Just because I like to have fun and guess at score makes me a spoiled trophy hunter! Give me a break!


----------



## berrysblaster (Nov 27, 2013)

PBH said:


> what a spoiled bunch of hunters we have become.
> 
> I remember when a 330 bull was a great trophy in anyone's book. Hunting is becoming a sad sport.


Nobody said it was a bad bull, in fact most say it's an exceptional bull but not as big as some suggested...


----------



## captain (Nov 18, 2007)

This is my Wasatch bull from last year. Mine seems to have better fronts, better mass, and a few longer points. Just to give you an idea he grossed 362" and Netted Just over 350" With that being said I would probably guess the bull in the picture to Gross around 330-340". But of course there were also people on this site that told me my bull didn't score what it did too. When I pulled the trigger on this bull I never once thought about what he would score. I just knew he was big enough for me. If you like the bull, shoot it!


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

captain said:


> This is my Wasatch bull from last year. Mine seems to have better fronts, better mass, and a few longer points. Just to give you an idea he grossed 362" and Netted Just over 350" With that being said I would probably guess the bull in the picture to Gross around 330-340". But of course there were also people on this site that told me my bull didn't score what it did too. When I pulled the trigger on this bull I never once thought about what he would score. I just knew he was big enough for me. If you like the bull, shoot it!


Wasatch?

There is no way. Read this forum and a day and you will learn that bulls that big don't live on the Wasatch. _(O)_

In all seriousness, beautiful bull.


----------



## berrysblaster (Nov 27, 2013)

captain said:


> This is my Wasatch bull from last year. Mine seems to have better fronts, better mass, and a few longer points. Just to give you an idea he grossed 362" and Netted Just over 350" With that being said I would probably guess the bull in the picture to Gross around 330-340". But of course there were also people on this site that told me my bull didn't score what it did too. When I pulled the trigger on this bull I never once thought about what he would score. I just knew he was big enough for me. If you like the bull, shoot it!


Anyone who thought that bull wasn't a slug is up in the night!


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

If there is a bigger joke in hunting than the "net" I would sure like to know what it is. About like discounting Jennifer Aniston because she has some toes that are shorter than they should be and a small cowlick on her lower neck.


----------



## Dahlmer (Sep 12, 2007)

brendo said:


> Seriously? Who has not said that is a trophy bull that they would shoot given the chance! I agree we are spoiled because utah has done a great job with our elk herds and there are plenty of 330+ bulls to be had.


I would disagree with the statement that there are plenty of 330+ bulls to be had. On most units in the state a legitimate 330+ gross bull would be in the top 30% of bulls taken. A bull scoring north of 360 is going look enormous. He will be long everywhere or have some feature that is exceptional while everything else is at least average or better.

That being said, this is an above average bull in terms of what is taken in Utah year in and year out. I think he has a chance of breaking 340, but not by much. If you see this bull during the hunt you had better give him serious consideration unless you know of a bigger bull that you can go after.

For a reference here are a few bulls that have been taken off of the Wasatch.

I'm not sure why, but every picture I took of this bull makes him look bigger than he really is. I didn't score him, but would guess he would score about 310. He is a really pretty bull though.


This is probably the most impressive bull I have ever been part of. His right 3rd is just over 30" and his left is over 24". If i remember right both beams are just over 50" and his swords are both over 18". His gross score is 339.




This is the best scoring bull we have killed. He grosses right at 350. He is also a good illustration of what it takes to get there. He has solid length everywhere but his 3rds which are 13". His g1' and g2's are all over 17". His g4's are both over 18" and his g5's are both over 13". His beams are over 50" with one stretching to 55". Mass is a good but not great and his width is just under 40".



Here are two more bulls with the one pictured above. The middle one scores about 315 and the one on the right has never been scored but should go about 300 give or take.



 
Finally here is the first bull I scored. I scored him at 227, but I think that was a little generous. In reality he might make 320.




There are a number of other bulls that I have been part of and the majority of them fall short of the 320 mark. 2 others might make the 330 mark.


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)

Nice looking bulls^^^


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

archin said:


> choot em!:shock:


+1

.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

SPOT ON Captain & Dahlmer....:!:.....


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

PBH said:


> what a spoiled bunch of hunters we have become.
> 
> I remember when a 330 bull was a great trophy in anyone's book. Hunting is becoming a sad sport.


Geeeez Heppy, when did you turn into such a Debbie-downer? Nobody is saying that bull sucks. You and W2U are overreacting a little, don't ya think?


----------



## Kevinitis (Jul 18, 2013)

Well UtahMountainMan, looks like you are gonna have to shoot him and measure to settle this.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

TS30 said:


> Geeeez Heppy, when did you turn into such a Debbie-downer? Nobody is saying that bull sucks. You and W2U are overreacting a little, don't ya think?


Overreacting? Hmmm....I don't know, but I do know that all this inches counting is nothing more than a penis measuring contest to see who has the biggest! If it is such a great bull regardless of its score, why the hell are we guessing its score?

Our elk hunting in this state is almost all managed according to inches (age objectives) and every time we turn around the age objectives seem to be getting raised on this unit or that unit....why? Because the bulls aren't scoring high enough for the inches crowd...!


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

wyoming2utah said:


> I do know that all this inches counting is nothing more than a penis measuring contest


Yet, you still jumped in...

This is a hunting forum, so it doesn't seem far fetched for us to be guessing size of a photo of a living bull. It passes the time. Doesn't mean anything other than, you are on a **** HUNTING FORUM!


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> Yet, you still jumped in...


Oh, I forgot to weigh in....I'm thinking he is around 8320 MM! Oh, wait, I forgot to deduct the inequalities between the left G3 and the right G3 and between then lengths of its right testicle versus its left...!-/|\\-


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Come on W2U. Things aren't that bad. Eat a snickers man, you're acting like a drama queen. 

Score is just a number. A bench mark, so to say, for people to classify animals however they choose to do it. I love looking at pics and guessing even though I've never held a LE elk tag before. In fact, I've never even held any kind of bull elk tag before. It's just for fun. Nobody is measuring anyone's penis. We're measuring antlers. ;-)

Relax man. It's just hunting. Don't take it so seriously.


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

Natural progression of things?

-back in the day- I remember judging Mulies by their width now its more common of a statement (in my circle of bud's anyway) to hear the inches thing... I agree with goob though, FAR to much emphasis is plugged on/in to an animals antler growth. Eye of the beholder - we hunt for different reasons stuff.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

All I want to know is:

1. how do you score a cow?

2. who maintains the record books?


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

PBH said:


> All I want to know is:
> 
> 1. how do you score a cow?
> 
> Buy her a drink to start with.Sorry,that just popped in there:grin:


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

PBH said:


> All I want to know is:
> 
> 1. how do you score a cow?
> 
> 2. who maintains the record books?


By the number of steaks I get from the back straps and how many pounds of hamburger I get off of it.

I keep those records. I only give them in exchange for trips for trophy brookies.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

I think its funny that in many places we can't openly talk about our largest passion without someone being offended, yet we live in the west. I don't talk about hunting all over, but when I get on our hunting forum its sad that every thread has someone just like the yuppies getting upset. This isn't a management plan or something like that. Its for fun. We can't even talk about our passion on here without someone getting at us.... We are in trouble.


----------



## RandomElk16 (Sep 17, 2013)

wyoming2utah said:


> Oh, I forgot to weigh in....I'm thinking he is around 8320 MM! Oh, wait, I forgot to deduct the inequalities between the left G3 and the right G3 and between then lengths of its right testicle versus its left...!-/|\\-


So looks like your guess is 327 9/16. Your with the small crowd.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Sad state of what hunting has become, Random, when a group of hunters can't sit and admire a great elk without other hunters coming on and criticizing them for not viewing it like they do.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

My queaston is, If someone dosent care about "scoring', Why complain about it?

As has been pointed out, this is a hunting forum ....

And scoring animails is VERY much a part of todays hunting activitys.

And learning how to score correctly take ALOT of pratice!!!!!!!
And no better way to learn than scoring ATOT of antlers!!!!!!!

Watching an animal on the hoof, harvesting it, then scoring it...
No better way to learn!

I sure hope mountain man gets this bull !----Scores it..That would be interisting!


----------



## AF CYN (Mar 19, 2009)

Very cool bull. I'd shoot him any day on any unit. Probably goes 350ish.


----------



## brendo (Sep 10, 2013)

Dahlmer. I agree a 330 bull is a NICE BULL! and a lot of people see a 300'' bull and think its a 350 bull that is why I love these guess the score threads than I can get better at truly field judging an animal. I dont know for a fact but have heard from a few people that this state has had a huge turn around for elk. would you agree that there are a lot more 330+ bulls running around now compared to back when we weren't spoiled hunters that only care about score say 10-15 years ago? That was a legitimate question. Also what is the difference of judging a deer by width vs score? Its still putting them in a category of small vs big its just a more accurate way of classifying them! Who cares if you judge an animal by its width, score, weight/meat? We are all doing what we enjoy and thats what should really matter right? For the most part I think we all want the same end result and that's whats best for our wildlife. Who know what the true answer to that is but we all want it.


----------



## goofy elk (Dec 16, 2007)

brendo said:


> would you agree that there are a lot more 330+ bulls running around now compared to back when we weren't spoiled hunters that only care about score say 10-15 years ago? .


OMH NO!!!!!!----Not 10 years ago ....

2004 was FREAKIN AWSOME STATE WIDE !!!!--might have been the peak.

25 years ago YES.


----------



## brendo (Sep 10, 2013)

Thanks for answering my question goofy! I wasn't really sure when Utah's elk herd started growing a lot


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

RandomElk16 said:


> I think its funny that in many places we can't openly talk about our largest passion without someone being offended, yet we live in the west. I don't talk about hunting all over, but when I get on our hunting forum its sad that every thread has someone just like the yuppies getting upset. This isn't a management plan or something like that. Its for fun. We can't even talk about our passion on here without someone getting at us.... We are in trouble.


Similar to my thoughts:
http://www.africanindaba.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/AfricanIndabaVol5-3.pdf

"The reduction of the individual and very personal value of 
hunting trophies to score sheets with numbers is deplorable. In 
fact, trophy mania destroys our hunting culture and makes 
mockery of our traditions."

Nothing, in my mind, has hurt our ability to hunt more than the trend of score sheets, B&C scores, and trophy hunting pop culture--magazines, videos, and TV shows!

So, by all means, talk about hunting, talk about your score sheets and deductions and net and gross and B&C and P&Y all you want....but don't think for a second that some of us might have a different opinion! I just find it sad that we have to measure our personal trophies on someone else's measuring stick!


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

goofy elk said:


> And learning how to score correctly take ALOT of pratice!!!!!!!


Why is that? Why is scoring difficult, or rather why is it subjective at all? If we're going to score animals, shouldn't it be based on something that is NOT subjective to the person doing the scoring? Sounds a bit silly to me. And, who is the governing body for this scoring?

cut the horns off and weigh them. Nothing subjective there.



brendo said:


> I dont know for a fact but have heard from a few people that this state has had a huge turn around for elk. would you agree that there are a lot more 330+ bulls running around now compared to back when we weren't spoiled hunters...


Why are there more big bulls today than 20 years ago? What changed?
Answer: opportunity

So we sacrifice opportunity in order to kill bulls that score more inches? That's why trophy hunting is sad to me. This is what scoring has done.

how many times have you heard someone complain about the "once-in-a-lifetime" LE Elk draws? It's because of scoring!


----------



## Dahlmer (Sep 12, 2007)

brendo said:


> I dont know for a fact but have heard from a few people that this state has had a huge turn around for elk. would you agree that there are a lot more 330+ bulls running around now compared to back when we weren't spoiled hunters that only care about score say 10-15 years ago?


I think across the state there are fewer 330+ bulls running around than there were in the early 2000's. As Goofy mentioned I think 2004 was the peak with about 20 400+ inch bulls taken in Utah in the same year. I first started hunting elk in 1989 and back then any branch antlered bull was considered a trophy, the DWR then began to shut down the Wasatch over the course of the next few years and it was only open to spike hunting for a few years before the LE hunts were introduced.

Is it better? It depends on your viewpoint. I personally feel that the Wasatch and Manti units ought to be managed more toward opportunity, but not everyone agrees with me.



brendo said:


> Also what is the difference of judging a deer by width vs score? Its still putting them in a category of small vs big its just a more accurate way of classifying them! Who cares if you judge an animal by its width, score, weight/meat? We are all doing what we enjoy and thats what should really matter right? For the most part I think we all want the same end result and that's whats best for our wildlife. Who know what the true answer to that is but we all want it.


No difference, just a system that provides the ability to classify and compare animals. Neither is good or bad in and of itself and both seem to suffer from some of the same limitations although measuring for width leaves less wiggle room.

The biggest issue with scoring seems to be twofold. First, many guys don't know how to do it and the scores they throw out are bogus. Second, if your going to base the success of your hunt on the score of the animal your likely to go home disappointed. It's a very poor measure in that regard, at least in my opinion. I believe if an animal looks good to you and for whatever reason you feel that it would satisfy your hunt, then take it.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

PBH said:


> Why is that? Why is scoring difficult, or rather why is it subjective at all? If we're going to score animals, shouldn't it be based on something that is NOT subjective to the person doing the scoring? Sounds a bit silly to me. And, who is the governing body for this scoring?
> 
> cut the horns off and weigh them. Nothing subjective there.


I don't want to speak for goofy, but I'm pretty sure he was referring to field judging when he said it is hard. Not the official scoring. Official scoring isn't hard, and has well defined procedures and rules. But you already know that.



PBH said:


> how many times have you heard someone complain about the "once-in-a-lifetime" LE Elk draws? It's because of scoring!


No it is not.

Question: Two bulls standing 20 yards from you, both offering the exact same shot to you with your bow. One is giant bodied bull with small forks, barely branch antlered. The other has massive antlers weighing in at 47KG and has over 9,000 mm of length. Both are legal for your tag. Which one you taking? Never mind...don't answer. We already know.


----------



## brendo (Sep 10, 2013)

That's all I'm trying to say dahlmer is are there some people that solely base their hunt off of score? Yes! Do the vast majority of us just enjoy the opportunity to be outdoors and spend time with family and scoring an animal is just for fun and we do it cause we can, I believe so. It shouldn't matter to us why people hunt just get out and do it!


----------

