Posts: 8866
| 50inchGrinch - 12/19/2009 4:41 PM
I still don't understand why some people defend liars.
The fishing industry is so full of IT that it makes me sick. Apparently the biggest BSers deserve the clients because all the Pickeral Petes hang on their every word of 30" girths and 10+ fish days.
Whatever, maybe I am insane and that's why it bugs me....
Darcy Cox
Ps- The new story on that walleye is that guy measured the girth with his hands.... uhhh yeah.
Darcy...
I don't think anybody is defending liars. We can all look at a fish, like the hybrid picture that's floating around out there that was claimed to be 45" and chuckle to ourselves, because it's probably not even 35". I agree that the guy probably didn't measure, and had no idea how big it really was. No experienced muskie angler would try to pass that fish off as 45".
I think on some level it bugs ALL of us. A LOT of anglers are so full of crap it has turned their eyes brown. I used to fish with a guy like that. Had a low 40's fish up on dawg, raised it twice. We all agreed at the time it was maybe 42". By the end of the day it was pushing 45 and tried to eat but missed. A week later it was 47". The last time I heard him tell the story, it was "at least 48", and not only did he hook it on the 8, but he had the fish on twice and it threw the lure both times. I WAS THERE, I saw the #*#*. I saw the fish, I saw what happened, and he STILL stood there in front of me, claiming he hooked the fish twice, and added a good 6" to the length on top of it.
Like it or not, muskie fishing is a lot of stories, and swipes and near misses, and big fish that just sort of take a sniff at a bait and go on their way never to be seen again.
I think we've all seen so much BS we've grown immune to it, and don't even pay attention anymore. Perfect example -- the fish I posted a picture of earlier... Is it 45"? Nobody even questioned that fish, because to a lot of people out there who might have only fished a few times, or are in their first season or two or whatever? You tell them 45" and they just think "oh, ok. 45". Wow."
The guys out there who know? I am sure people looked at that picture and said "that ain't 45". He's full of crap..."
That fish was 40" on the nose. Camera angles and the way you hold a fish can play tricks on the mind. I've got fish that WERE 45" that look a whole lot smaller than the one in the picture does.
There are also those who would look at a picture of a fish that WAS 45", and immediately reply and say "no way, that fish wasn't even 40! Look at how he is holding it, look at his hands, look at this or that..."
Those are the same people posting pictures of 46-48" fish and calling them 51", posting pictures of a fish and saying it has a 28" girth...
Hmph. 28", eh? I had a 28" girth back in high school. I've seen a few fish that could reasonably go that big, and some that you could look at and think "yeah, that fish could actually be over that!" When I see numbers tossed around that are in the 32" range? Yeah, okay, whatever.
I have a challenge for everyone here. Take a flexible sewing tape, and find something that has a 26" girth. I don't give a crap what is is, just find something.
Then find something that has a 28" girth.
Or try this: Blow all the air out of your lungs. Meausre your chest. Take a huge breath. Meausre it again...
It doesn't take a lot of thickness to make a few extra inches in girth, does it? The difference in how fat a 27" girth looks on a fish compared to a 28" girth? Nobody can tell from a picture. The only people who can look at a picture and say the girth wasn't what it was claimed to be are people who have caught enough really big fish with girths that didn't even come close, and know how rare and freakishly huge a fish with a 32" girth would have to be.
|
