How many different skill levels are there, big buck hunters?

[Stanley]

Got to thinking about this. Most sports have different skill levels involved. In the pursuit of big bucks how many different skill levels are there? Example: rookie, mid level, seasoned veteran. Is there a way to separate the levels into a broader range? It would be hard to argue the big guns, Like Dan Infalt, Myles Keller, Gene and Barry Wensel, and some others have (list not conclusive) to be considered the top tier hunters. How do the rest of the hunters get categorized?

[magicman54494]

I'm at the "I've proved all I need to myself and now I just enjoy the hunt" level.
Funny thing is I'm killing them at a much higher rate now then ever before.
Unless I'm getting paid, I have to ask why there is a need for levels anyway?

[dan]

I don't know how you could possibly break hunters down into levels of skill... I think most people considered in the "Pro" category are self proclaimed pros...
What would be the determining factor making a guy a "pro"? Kills? An unskilled person can make a few big kills just buy paying to hunt premium land.
When I was a kid, one of the guys I looked up to was Dick Idol... And he rarely shot a buck. But I still considered him a pro.

[Stanley]

I'm at the "I've proved all I need to myself and now I just enjoy the hunt" level.
Funny thing is I'm killing them at a much higher rate now then ever before.
Unless I'm getting paid, I have to ask why there is a need for levels anyway?

Need no, Actuality they exist. There are levels in just about all walks of life. On the job for example pay scales are a great example. Some think clergymen are on a level above and closer to God. We are even measured by wealth (Forbes). So to ask if there is a need, no, but levels do exist.

[Stanley]

I don't know how you could possibly break hunters down into levels of skill... I think most people considered in the "Pro" category are self proclaimed pros...
What would be the determining factor making a guy a "pro"? Kills? An unskilled person can make a few big kills just buy paying to hunt premium land.
When I was a kid, one of the guys I looked up to was Dick Idol... And he rarely shot a buck. But I still considered him a pro.

I always take into consideration if a guy has earned what he has, or inherited it. I don't consider most of the pro hunters top tier.

[Uncle Lou]

Stanley I think this is a worthwhile discussion. With the 3 levels you posted, I would say I am above rookie and below seasoned veteran, I am still learning too much to put myself above mid level.

Magic hit on something that I have been thinking about, he said he is at the enjoy the hunt level. I have been wandering how much enjoyment everyone is getting out of hunting lately. Getting into the BEAST method here as many do, there is some serious stuff going on. I am going to start another thread instead of jack yours anymore.

[magicman54494]

I'm at the "I've proved all I need to myself and now I just enjoy the hunt" level.
Funny thing is I'm killing them at a much higher rate now then ever before.
Unless I'm getting paid, I have to ask why there is a need for levels anyway?

Need no, Actuality they exist. There are levels in just about all walks of life. On the job for example pay scales are a great example. Some think clergymen are on a level above and closer to God. We are even measured by wealth (Forbes). So to ask if there is a need, no, but levels do exist.

I believe they exist because humans have egos and feel the need to rank themselves because of it. It took me a while to understand why I really hunt and when I discovered the true nature it was no longer important to kill to impress or obtain a level or brag. When you reach that "level" you discover there are no levels.

[dan]

In the machine shop I work in often guys will come in and ask "who is the best machinist you got?" Its easy to tell the difference between a "green" machinist who just got started in the trade and a guy with 20 years experience, but not so easy to tell the difference between the guys who have been doing it a while... One guy might be great at running a certain machine, another might be "good" at running almost everything... I would consider myself a great machinist. Top level maybe... But, I have not run a CNC mill or lathe in such a long time I would have a hard time going over and programing a complex job, but some of the machinist whom have to ask me how to do there jobs, and are certainly not up to my skill level could walk over and program these jobs easily.
I guess what I am getting at is it is the same in hunting... I would consider myself a great hunter. But Magic might be a better tracker, Tadman might be better in the bigwoods... Stan might be better on a farm... Maybe, maybe not, but the fact is, we each have our skills, and the things we lack in... Thats what makes this site great. We each come here with skills to share, and we each have a thing or two to learn... Pretty hard to rate us...

[Stanley]

I'm at the "I've proved all I need to myself and now I just enjoy the hunt" level.
Funny thing is I'm killing them at a much higher rate now then ever before.
Unless I'm getting paid, I have to ask why there is a need for levels anyway?

Need no, Actuality they exist. There are levels in just about all walks of life. On the job for example pay scales are a great example. Some think clergymen are on a level above and closer to God. We are even measured by wealth (Forbes). So to ask if there is a need, no, but levels do exist.

I believe they exist because humans have egos and feel the need to rank themselves because of it. It took me a while to understand why I really hunt and when I discovered the true nature it was no longer important to kill to impress or obtain a level or brag. When you reach that "level" you discover there are no levels.

I kind of disagree with that. When I listed the top tier hunters (short list) their egos were not part of the equation. Not too many would disagree with that list. It's not so much how good we think we are but how good others think we are. Thus we have levels of skill not self proclaimed.

I will agree that some of the TV hunters have egos. I realy don't consider many of the TV hunters as top tier. Most hunters can't give an honest evaluation of themselves because they don't really know how to.

[Singing Bridge]

I agree with Stan that we often "compare" skill levels between people in various ways. Is it necessary? Of course not, but it exists and is discussed quite often in various ways.

When it comes to "rating" skill level among deer hunters, I have always put it in terms that others can relate to easily. I use the skill levels of professional baseball to "rate" hunters if I feel so compelled to do so. I therefore use five (5) skill levels to typically describe where it "appears" a hunter may be. I leave rank amateurs out of the professional scale for obvious reasons. Here is my scale beginning with the lower level of hunter proficiency:

* High School Varsity player

* "Single A" player

* "Double AA" player

* "Triple AAA" player

* "Big League" player

I find this system quick and easy to use and for others to understand.

Stanley asked, after all.

[Stanley]

In the machine shop I work in often guys will come in and ask "who is the best machinist you got?" Its easy to tell the difference between a "green" machinist who just got started in the trade and a guy with 20 years experience, but not so easy to tell the difference between the guys who have been doing it a while... One guy might be great at running a certain machine, another might be "good" at running almost everything... I would consider myself a great machinist. Top level maybe... But, I have not run a CNC mill or lathe in such a long time I would have a hard time going over and programing a complex job, but some of the machinist whom have to ask me how to do there jobs, and are certainly not up to my skill level could walk over and program these jobs easily.
I guess what I am getting at is it is the same in hunting... I would consider myself a great hunter. But Magic might be a better tracker, Tadman might be better in the bigwoods... Stan might be better on a farm... Maybe, maybe not, but the fact is, we each have our skills, and the things we lack in... Thats what makes this site great. We each come here with skills to share, and we each have a thing or two to learn... Pretty hard to rate us...

In my experience in the machine shop (prototype machinists). You had guys that could just flat do it. You had guys that could do it but took more time. You had guys that were so slow it was ridiculous but they could put out some super good work. You had guys that could do it fast and their work was very poor. It was very tough to find someone who could do it fast and very good. I'm talking all journeyman machinists not green horns.

I too am sure most everyone has something they are better at than most. A doctor can't work on an engine as well as an engine mechanic. It is hard to rate hunters. But in one sense if 1000 guys say Dan Infalt is a great hunter and 1 guy says he isn't who's more correct?

This site is a learning experience for all that want it to be. There is more great information on this site than other site period. I believe this is because the skill level of hunters on this site is above and beyond other hunting sites members skill levels. The guys on the Beast are here to learn and share that is for sure.

That also brings into play everyone can teach anyone something that is on a lower skill level than they are. I always listen and learn from hunters that are on a greater skill level than myself. I also believe I have something to offer for those on a lowers kill level than myself. So I'm sure skill levels are more important than some think they are.

[Stanley]

I agree with Stan that we often "compare" skill levels between people in various ways. Is it necessary? Of course not, but it exists and is discussed quite often in various ways.

When it comes to "rating" skill level among deer hunters, I have always put it in terms that others can relate to easily. I use the skill levels of professional baseball to "rate" hunters if I feel so compelled to do so. I therefore use five (5) skill levels to typically describe where it "appears" a hunter may be. I leave rank amateurs out of the professional scale for obvious reasons. Here is my scale beginning with the lower level of hunter proficiency:

* High School Varsity player

* "Single A" player

* "Double AA" player

* "Triple AAA" player

* "Big League" player

I find this system quick and easy to use and for others to understand.

Stanley asked, after all.

Great example.

[Brian]

I spent 3 days in March with Barry Wensel at one of his boot camps. It was informative and fun and I always admired Barry and his brother Gene since I was in middle school in the mid 80's. However, these guys are and always have hunted EXCLUSIVE areas that hold huge deer. As we walked Barry's 350 acre farm he manages in SW Iowa, he showed us an area exceeding 100 plus acres they will not disturb as a "sanctuary". I and most "average Joes" would kill for just 40 acres (or less) to hunt anywhere in the Midwest and have exclusive access. Dan and many others who harvest 3 year plus bucks on public and "knock on door" private land are the REAL hunters that I want to learn from. Heck, Barry would display anguish and disgust when he thought a trespasser might have stepped on one of his prized farms. In fact, this place was so exclusive, Barry and Gene couldn't even have their family members on the property. My point, God Bless the lucky but most of us are much better hunters than what our trophy wall might show. And, I'd be willing to bet that a lot of these "hunting celebs" couldn't hunt their way out of a paper bag if they weren't sitting over a big food plot on a high fenced "deer pen".

[ Post made via iPad ]

[dan]

I spent 3 days in March with Barry Wensel at one of his boot camps. It was informative and fun and I always admired Barry and his brother Gene since I was in middle school in the mid 80's. However, these guys are and always have hunted EXCLUSIVE areas that hold huge deer. As we walked Barry's 350 acre farm he manages in SW Iowa, he showed us an area exceeding 100 plus acres they will not disturb as a "sanctuary". I and most "average Joes" would kill for just 40 acres (or less) to hunt anywhere in the Midwest and have exclusive access. Dan and many others who harvest 3 year plus bucks on public and "knock on door" private land are the REAL hunters that I want to learn from. Heck, Barry would display anguish and disgust when he thought a trespasser might have stepped on one of his prized farms. In fact, this place was so exclusive, Barry and Gene couldn't even have their family members on the property. My point, God Bless the lucky but most of us are much better hunters than what our trophy wall might show. And, I'd be willing to bet that a lot of these "hunting celebs" couldn't hunt their way out of a paper bag if they weren't sitting over a big food plot on a high fenced "deer pen".

[ Post made via iPad ]

Welcome to the Beast Brian... Based on that post, I know you will fit in.

[dan]

I think rather than rank hunters based on skill, we should categorize them by what phase there in.... Then we would just need to come up with good descriptions for the phases... I think we can all agree that hunters go thru different phases as they progress, correct?