Jay wrote:B.S grand View. This was not handled by the B&C rules and they know it.
Wrong. It was handled correctly by B&C rules.
Circumstances (the broken main beam) dictated that the King rack be inspected and ruled whether it could even be scored by a B&C review committee prior to a score being submitted and reviewed by the same B&C authority. So.............you have been deprived of the opportunity to say that an official B&C scorer initially scored the rack as a World Record...................before being lowered by an official B&C review.
Momentary disappointment for Johnny King, but sucks to be you...........don't it?
Why do you think so many B&C scorers are still in line with this?
It is not unusual at all for B&C scorers to score a buck that is subsequently lowered significantly upon review by B&C. Does that make the original scorers incompetent? Or the subsequent B&C ruling by B&C conspiratorial and wrong? Of course not.
Two relatively recent examples are the Zaft and Koberstein bucks. They were both originally scored by official B&C scorers with net scores well above 200. Were their original scores overruled on vague technicalities or inequitable treatment? No........the respective scores were lowered upon review by B&C and for justifiable reasons within their rules.
Again you take what Montana says as the truth, but its not. No group looked at in in PA and I have the proof.
You don't have any "proof". I've read your conjecture and barely comprehensible stories about contacting the three named principles that checked the broken King rack in PA. Funny..............there isn't any direct statement from any of them that agrees with you.
There is nothing in the procedure......or the decision.......that would lead anyone with more than two functioning synapses to take the word of an antler collector from Wisconsin over the collective experience and knowledge of three senior officers from P&Y and B&C. Particularly when the reasons for the abnormal point decision have been displayed and justified. As yet, neither you nor any previous scorer of the King rack have addressed the B&C reply.............nor the Fair Chase article. Why is that?
Jack is still to this day changing his story on what happened.
Says the antler collector from Wisconsin............who owns the rack. You have a sad story..............without corroboration or logic.
I guess I am different than you, I don't follow blindly like a sheep.
You are indeed different. But you are following a path of familiarity. Unfortunately, a path that was spawned by the very organization whose director you're more than happy to revile to fit your personal agenda. The scoring and keeping of records will bring out the the extremes of society. The worst as well as the best.
You are where you want to be, on the minority side and stiring the pot. Thats what you do and it works for you, the Grand Standing on the losing side.
I find it amusing when people forget how public and ever-lasting words typed into the Internet are. "Stirring the pot" indeed.
Contact me in two years to review the "King Buck Saga".