|
|
Posts: 97
Location: Pickering, ON | If you want to get a good idea on how various girths look on various lengths of fish, check out:
http://www.1000islandsfishing.com/muskie.htm
You can see how, for example, a 24/25" girth looks absolutely enormous on a 48-51 inch fish vs. say on a 55+ inch.
Girth (and how much of the fish it extends for) is the king in terms of what the fish will truly ultimately weigh. A fish with a giant but short belly will be less heavy than a fish with a lesser girth but one which is carried across more of it's length.
There's only one way to know the true exact weight of any given fish, and that's to weigh it on a certified scale (suggestion would be for Chatillon, which you could use to weigh a fish horizontally in the net with, and then release it).
However, seeing as how 99% will never catch one that crosses 40lbs due to the fact that this is possible on a very limited number of waters, most shouldn't bother.
Edited by JeffinPickering 12/4/2009 9:34 AM
|
|
| |
|
| That site puts things in perspective. I agree wih bn's story. Too many crazy people. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1245
Location: Madtown, WI | OK, don't want to call out anyone in particular, thats not my objective. But like others said...you find one that is stated as a huge girth when in fact is a "nice fat fish" with a 23-24" girth. Then joe smo goes out and catches a REALLY nice fish...say 48 X 23 and feels he MUST have measured it wrong....based on his comparisons to other fish he has seen with 25-27" girths....
so I found a couple pics , one I thought were a "questionable" girth. See what you think. Compare these three fish...one is 47.5 by "26". Then a 54 X 22, then the larry fish of 58 X 27.
(cory 54 inch 7 24 09 #3 low res.JPG)
Attachments
----------------
 47.5 X 26.jpg (158KB - 195 downloads)
cory 54 inch 7 24 09 #3 low res.JPG (62KB - 223 downloads)
larry fish.jpg (70KB - 274 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 425
Location: Roseau | This one went 51" x 23", not sure on the 23", its the only fish I have girthed.
I cant imagine a 25" plus!!
Thanks
Attachments
----------------
untitled.JPG (74KB - 181 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 97
Location: Pickering, ON | C.Painter - 12/4/2009 11:50 AM
so I found a couple pics , one I thought were a "questionable" girth. See what you think. Compare these three fish...one is 47.5 by "26". Then a 54 X 22, then the larry fish of 58 X 27.
My thoughts on these:
1. the 26" on the 47 is absolutely absurd, unless it was in a press when girthed.
2. The 54X22 looks fatter because of the angle. The middle to rear section tells the tale that 22 is probably a good number.
3. The Larry fish - a perfect example of what I said earlier. The fish is no doubt a total supertanker, and I do not question it at all. When you put a 27" girth on a 57" fish vs. a 51" fish it usually looks completely different.
In Fisher's post, you can see how chub 23" girth looks on a 51".
There, that's my internet scientific analysis for the day.
Now, I'm off to sharpen hooks for tomorrow.
Edited by JeffinPickering 12/4/2009 12:28 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1245
Location: Madtown, WI | See Fisher...now that is a prime example....look at the girth on that thing....very nice fish...and 23 to me spot on....
thanks for sharing.. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | BNelson - 12/4/2009 7:52 AM
Pointer, I'm no sherrif,,,
makes for good winternet.
I said you were a sheriff, not a sherrif. 
I know it makes for good winternet. Hence why I posted what I did.
If people feel down that their fish doesn't measure up to others fish, they are fishing for the wrong reason and will never be satisfied. And will likely be upset at every post I make. I look at the measurements of fish and simply smile because in reality I don't care what dimensions they think it is and they likely don't care if people don't believe them. I've talked to guys who legitimately believe they have caught 69-70 inch tiger muskies. "Seriously man, it was longer than my canoe. We never landed it but I measured my canoe later and that is how big it was. I know it." I've actually heard those words. I tried to tell him that he would have easily shattered the world record. "Oh I know it was a world record." I tried to explain things to him but he honest to god got peeed at me for not believing him. I just dropped it and wished him good luck and hoped he land another world record.
Whats my point? Some people simply don't know. Sure we can try and educate but some people are set in their ways and nothing we say, post, or explain will ever ring true to them. So trying to bring them out of their fantasy world is pointless. They are living happily and enjoying fishing and if they are releasing their strange dimensioned fish, who cares? The fantasy world population is much larger than the true girth measuring population. You're fighting an uphill battle and the hill is covered in ice. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1245
Location: Madtown, WI | Its one thing if people are in their fantasy world and we can't get them out....its another if they define their world based on false info they gather from wrongly measured/guessed etc fish from the 'net.
Its the newbies that this false info affects the most....not the seasoned vets who actually have measured and weight a good number of fish to know...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 427
Location: Wausau | My boat rocks both ways...the false information does not effect my life and/or happiness...the other side...I'm somewhat disappointed that our "spotlight" professionals who make a living within the industry and are a voice for the musky community allow such "fantasy" girths to be publicly displayed. In situations of control, where the powers-to-be can delete/modify inappropriate social (internet) behavior, then why not control the information in certain situations to avoid controversy and/or detract from those who willingly share fish of true statue. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | So you're asking the moderators to judge whether a person is a liar or just measured incorrectly because they don't know how or were excited and just screwed it up? Seems like a pretty big request you're asking. It is one thing to moderate the Tom Foolery, it's quite another to question what someone may believe to be entirely true and simply not know any different. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 457
Location: Minneconia | Hey that guy's face looks familiar.... |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | so that fish is suppose to be 30" girth? interesting....look at some of the 27-29s on the thousand island site and i guess I don't see it being 30"....it's huge yes, but 30?
it takes a LOT to hit 40 lbs...the number is thrown around way too much these days...most would believe a 54" fish with a healthy summer girth would easily hit 40 lbs right? well it doesn't...
as others have stated the only way to know what they weigh is to weigh them which I have started to do on a few just to see...
what was Marc Thorpe saying in that one thread..that it is rare for a fish to have a girth 1/2 it's length? a guy who knows a thing or 2 about big fat fish...I agree..take any 48 and if you put a 24" girth on it..it's a slob, 50 x 25, slob....52 x 26 slob...
and there are fish all over the net the last season like 47.3 x 26, 48 x 28, 48x26...just to name a few...
they just are not measuring them right ...or at all...and these guys aren't newbies or rookies...they simply are doing one of 2 things..they are calling them way too big based off other (exaggerated) fish on the net...or they want them to be a certain weight...
a fish caught recently was less than 48 but by the girth measurement put the fish at 46+ lbs...c'mon.... oh and he held it out w/ both arms...he must be strong. hah.
funny all the pms and emails I've gotten since starting this thread about how guys are glad finally someone pointed this out... 
happy Winternet.
Edited by BNelson 12/4/2009 5:13 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| Yep, 30". Knowing who it is and where and when it was caught? I don't doubt it. It doesn't change the fact that a LOT of the lengths and girths you see out there are inflated, but I believe this one. As for holding that fish out? Brad, you're not a big guy. I'm pretty sure you could hold 50 pounds out away from your body. At least I hope you could. 50 pounds is a whole lot of muskie, but it's not a whole lot of weight... |
|
| |
|
| So, the formula would put that fish at around 60 lbs. Painters fish on the formula is around 32-33 lbs. You really think that fish is almost twice as big? I think you are looking at maybe a low 40 lber there.
Edited by Baby Mallard 12/4/2009 6:35 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | I wasn't referring to the fish in your pic about holding it out...Ive got a few in the 40 lb mark and trust me...they are hard as heck to hold up and out for too long...it is different lifting a 40 lb dumbell and a 40 lb mass that is 50+" long....
I don't see that fish going 60...not even close to 50... what is funny is the fish I have weighed have all been within 1 lb of the formula on this site... pretty accurate...we haven't weighed one over 40...but we will...and i'm sure it will be spot on w /the formula...
Edited by BNelson 12/4/2009 5:57 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 221
| http://watch.thecomedynetwork.ca/south-park/season-13/#clip241206
...a Southpark episode every Musky Fisherman needs to watch.
Darcy Cox |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | Here in lies my point of wanting moderators to make the ultimate decision on what posts get deleted vs which are kept. It is a judgment call. Saying the moderators should have to make that ultimate decisions is asking far too much. If you really, truly do not care (which most have stated) then this really shouldn't be an issue. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 366
| What do you think this one girths at?
I remember when I was a kid and hearing Hulk Hogan say he had 24" biceps, and a bunch of kids at school talking about their bicep dimensions. I remember measuring mine and thinking how full of it a couple guys were. Really no different a situation here, and obviously the same kids would grow up and lie about fish dimensions.
Attachments
----------------
IMG_0174.JPG (96KB - 240 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 427
Location: Wausau | I am not suggesting moderators judge a fish or others play sheriff and it could be that I don't have full knowledge of how a website runs. I was thinking more along the lines of just removing the measurements, but keeping the story and picture. I see this happening maybe 2x a year, when such Tom Foolery is blatantly obvious. I'm thinking more along the lines of trying to avoid group stereotypes and as Bradly mentioned false 'one-ups-menship' where "my fish must have been bigger". I'm hoping a few higher profile musky personalities/guides take more ownership in directing positive change and growth within the sport. I understand pointing fingers and calling people a lair is a dangerous game when people provide your income. Again, I think avoidance of the issue by removing the measurements, but trying to keep the pictures and story, shows one supports big fish, CPR and the hunt, but not unintentional falsehood...well hopefully unintentional. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | I would say that is probably a more fair assessment Andy. And to some extent I believe it does happen. For example the couple of fish that were claimed over 60 inches. I don't think those posts lasted too long before everyone was in agreement that they were a farce, and the fish ended up being taken down. Now some of that was likely due to the fish's claimed dimensions were questioned by everyone and their brother. But I still stand by that some really truly believe that their fish was the size they claim. The one from Lac Seul two or three years ago was refuted vehemently, yet at an outing a couple of us witnessed the angler showing off the pictures and telling the stories. All in all it is hard to be the ultimate judge in the case of is this guy making this up for notoriety or is does he really truly believe what he's saying and is just incorrect? An above average joe can make a mistake. Even a die hard can make a mistake, though less likely. |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | I do agree, some will believe it from fautly measuring....ya know the ol piece of line and net handle concoction....those are easily spotted...and i agree, they believe their fish was X" length by how poorly they measured it...those are one thing...but it's the rest that are clearly not doing something right or not doing it all that baffles me...even EA's pic above..by the formula that fish is 60.19 lbs!!! um ok yah, that 53.5 is right there with McNairs beast..um right... does anyone really think that 53.5 is even remotely close to 60 pounds?????..with the formula being fairly accurate that says one thing to me...the guy didn't measure the girth correctly...when you get over 50", inches in girth make a huge difference...so say that 53.5 above was more like 27, which is a stretch imo...well then on the formula it drops all the way to 48.75lbs...say it was more like 25, down to 41.8 lbs...girth is huge...that fish is no where near 60 lbs...which says something went wrong..
somewhere...and I don't care per say that it was or wasn't 30...again it goes back to all the girths flying around to the avg joe that gets a 24" girthed fish and is let down.....as stated by others in this thread that very thing has happened to them....call a spade a spade...
Edited by BNelson 12/4/2009 6:26 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Twin Cities | I just saw a pic of a 53x28 that was very recently caught but an angler who knows what the $)(*#@$ he's doing. It looks WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY fatter than the fish above with the face blotched. And the gentleman i'm referring too is a decent sized guy and can't hold it out like that.... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | I bet that 'let down' is an eye opening experience for them. That gives them a frame of reference to look at fish and realize that their dimensions are likely inflated, whether purposely or accidentally. The more people that are 'let down' the more people get educated, so to speak. I'd imagine the let down period isn't as traumatic as we're thinking here. I'd be willing to bet the reaction is more of, "it's only a 20 inch girth? Really?.....(pause as brain wraps around the fact)....Ok, some of these girth measurements guys are reporting are bogus." One more person to join the police force
As for the guys that don't measure the girth and report one, there really isn't a way to stop it. You can question it publicly, but in the end what does it accomplish? A thread like this brings to light that this happens and hopefully rings true to some people. I guess that is a small victory against these hardened criminals. |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | Pointer...I by no means am a girth or length police just calling out the recent trend of crazy inflated girths..just havin a little fun w/ it...since it's 18 degrees and I'm going fishing tomorrow....many who actually fish and catch big fish seem to agree that it was something a long time coming....you fish for 30 inch tigers in Utah so maybe you don't care as much....go over to MHunter board and debate with those guys now would ya..
Edited by BNelson 12/4/2009 6:47 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8772
| JRedig - 12/4/2009 6:30 PM
I just saw a pic of a 53x28 that was very recently caught but an angler who knows what the $)(*#@$ he's doing. It looks WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY fatter than the fish above with the face blotched. And the gentleman i'm referring too is a decent sized guy and can't hold it out like that....
Does being a full time Canadan guide for over 25 years constiture "knowing what the %^#*%^ you are doing?" How about handling more 50" - 55" fish in a season than most of us will catch in a lifetime, every year since before a lot of guys here were born?
|
|
| |
|
Location: Twin Cities | I wonder how many times I can use this picture for a reference...the fish above claimed to be 53.5 x 30.
The one in this link...51x29...
http://www.muskiebreath.com/media/articleimages/article1.jpg
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Gotta love winter.
Edited by JRedig 12/4/2009 6:59 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | EA I don't care how many big fish a guy has caught, to me that says they are good at catching big fish...doesn't mean they might not inflate a measurement here or there...again, go look at the thousand island site..there isn't a fish on there w/ a 30" girth...but that 53.5 is 30???? also look at the articles at the bottom of the fish that weighed 41-46 lbs..all in the 54-56.5 range and fat..and these were weighed..55x27" in the article..44 lbs...56.5 x27.5, 46.6 lbs...and you are going to tell us your friends fish was close to 50 but it was not as long...not a chance. when a number like 53.5 x 30 is thrown on a pic and then the pic is shown..it sure better look like a 60 lber...or even 50...and it doesn't...as baby mallard says...it was probably 40, maybe 45...i got a 53 x 23.5 that Im pretty sure in the daylight w/ the same hold as that 53.5 would look verrrrrry similiar... just sayin'..I know there is a pic of a 53.5 x 25.5 a buddy who caught it is going to post..might put things of your friends fish in perspective... until then....50 lbers for everyone!
Edited by BNelson 12/4/2009 7:39 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 283
| Wasn't Gelb's fish a couple yrs ago 53x28.5? My numbers might be wrong, but Gelb's fish was a lot bigger than EA's pic. |
|
| |
|
| your numbers are right, it weighed 51 lbs, and 2 ounces. |
|
| |
|
| As I always say, some people greatly inflate the length and girths of their catches... I have seen the many inflated girths others are referring too and couldn't agree with them more. One does nor have to sit back and just congratulate one on a great catch when it is BS. Oh and Esoxaddict- THAT FISH DOES NOT HAVE A 30 INCH GIRTH. A nice fish with a nice photo to back it up, yes. But a 30 inch girth... GIVE ME A BREAK.
John |
|
| |
