That's a lot better picture. You can tell that the G2 on the left is going to be an issue. I love the way the ends of the beams look. It looks like they just kinda ran out of gas from holding all that up. No matter what it scores it is a world class buck. I have chased a lot of world record rumors for various magazines and I know better than to give up on any of them until a tape is put to the buck by scorer.
I have seen photos that were very misleading as to the final score, both larger and smaller. I can take a 140 buck and make it look like a 160 in a picture and I have seem people take a 160 and make it look like a 140. It is all in the angle and the lens. Let me tell you a little story that will help you better understand the way this thread has gone.
Back in the late 90's when I was the editor of MUSKIE magazine, I was sent a photo of person holding a muskie that he said was 60 inches. The fish was photographed and released. Now a 60-inch muskie is just as rare as 220-inch typical whitetail. The picture was of an obviously huge fish, but I was skeptical about running it because I knew both he and I would be subject to some criticism. Well I decided to run the thing as is, and see what happened.
Just like in deer hunting there are a lot of wanna-be experts out there, and the website message board lit up with posts about the fish as soon as the magazine came out. It looked just about like this thread actually, except I don't think there was a reference to Britney Spears.
Anyway, the great thing about these message boards is that there are people from all walks of life on them. And for everyone who thinks he is an expert, there is a real expert quietly lurking. Lo and behold I got a call from an avid muskie angler who was a forensic photo analyst for the FBI. He wanted to know if I would forward him the original photo so he could analyze it. He also wanted to know more information about the person in the photo, such as height, weight etc.
I provided him all the info and he used techniques of comparing the measurements of known objects (the distance between the knuckles on the man's hand, a pop can sitting on the boat seat beside him, etc.) and he came to the conclusion that he could testify in court that the fish could very well be 60 inches, in fact, it likely was within an inch either side of 60.
So I hope you can understand that when a person starts his post with the words, "I can promise you..." I am going to say that he's full of BS, which is exactly what the post is.
Now I will let this go.
