Additionally, not all Outfitters are created the same. Some are very good and do a great job of managing their herd. Your chances at nice mature bucks at these places are very high.

Conversely, there are several "fly by night" Outfitters up north that just kill anything. They don't manage their places well and your chances of getting a nice mature buck are "slim to none" (Btw, Slim left town)! They use the Kansas, Illinois, etc tag to lure in would be clients.

my lil buddy rob with an agenda??? no way!

this has nothing to do with HF for me. I'm just with stxranchman that body weight isn't as related to antler size as you say. from a particular region a relative larger bodied deer is probably older and more likely has a larger rack. however, a 300# New York buck is likely to have a rack many Texans wouldn't shoot and a small bodied Texas (example stxranchman used was low fence) can have a record rack.

let's not be jerks guys, that means being open minded and trying to attack another user for something unrelated (high fence opinions).

Rob, first of all, you are the one that called me names.

So did you mean to say, "let's not be jerks guys, that means being open minded and trying to attack another user for something unrelated (high fence opinions) unless it is me doing the attacking"?

Next, I didn't say the bigger the body the bigger the horns. What I said was that the bigger the body, THE EASIER IT IS TO GROW BIGGER HORNS. Do you really think (all genetics equal) it is easier for a 130lb deer to grow 180" Vs. 225lb deer? Throw out nontypical stuff because scoring is skewed when adding non-typicals. You can have a antler set from a nontyp that weighs 4lbs out score a typ rack that weighs 6lbs. Even on typicals a 6" browtine with 1" circum. scores the same a a 6" one with 3" of circum. Point being that sometimes "bigger" racks don't score higher.

Lastly, in the part of Kansas I was raised, I have seen very few mature deer (5.5 to 7.5yr old) with a rack less than 130". Over 80% of them were 150" or bigger. In some parts of the state (and other norhern states), the groceries for them just isn't as good and you see many smaller racks.

My final statement is this: I have been hunting for over 35 years, have friends in many northern states and have seen over a thousand harvested deer. Zero of them weighed 300lbs. Biggest deer I have touched was 275lbs on the hoof and came from Minnesota. Yes, there are 300lb whitetails....but, what does it have to do with hunting Kansas or Illinois for a nice buck?

"What I said was that the bigger the body, THE EASIER IT IS TO GROW BIGGER HORNS."

this is what I disagree with except isolating to an area. I would put my money on a 160 pound South Texas deer over a 260 pound New York deer. small bodied deer can grow huge antlers and large bodied deer have no chance at huge antlers. my point is body size has less influence on antler size than many other things like genetics and age.

Out of those two I would choose Kansas

You make no sense Rob.

I'm sorry you aren’t capable of understanding.

I think y'all should all go hunt in Illinois.

Looks like it is going to be, Kansas is a little cheaper and I have a couple more weeks to decide if I am actaully going to take the trip if I go to Kansas.

Another thing that a lot of people forget is that there are over 20 sub-species of White-tailed deer on the North American continent. They change from region to region, even in the state of Texas. That explains why the Hill Country Deer don't get as big as the South Texas Deer. I also know that there is a huge difference in deer size, both body and horns, between Pike County Illinois and Pike County Missouri. The Mississippi River is a barrier.