|
|
Location: Contrarian Island | Travis, so since you fish mainly open water pretty much all the time, and I spend my time fishing quite a bit shallower on avg, (not over the basin)
you're good at what you do, I'm pretty good at what I do...
just hypothetically....if you were to spend 500 hrs per season and I spent 500 hrs per season could we simply look at how many we put in the net based on that same # of hours? or, have you looked at fish per hour in your boat? might be another way to figure that variable out.. you don't think that contacting more fish equates to more in the net by your above statement...if you put 80 in the boat and I put 160 isn't that argument settled and vice versa...if you put 160 and I put 80 then maybe I'd be out there over open water w you..but I doubt that is the case...just random thoughts about your comment that more contacts might not mean more in the net...I'd agree for an avg or below avg fishermen that is the case...but an above avg fishermen w more contacts will simply convert more into striking by a number of factors....of course no way of knowing with 100% certainty but imo it seems logical.
imo more contacts will equate to more fish in the net, if you are a good fishermen....
interesting tho to see that most are agreeing that 5 or more contacts for 1 in the net
Edited by BNelson 6/9/2011 2:08 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | I don’t keep track of hours, follows, or anything for that matter anymore. I don’t see the point to. Just my opinion. So perhaps I am not at a 1:1, or a 2:1 caught to follow ratio. Just best guess here.
Not arguing Brad you are clearly a better fisherman. I don’t put the hours in anymore that you do. I don’t catch as many fish as you do either.
Would be interesting to see the results if we each put 500 hours in a season, and compared notes. However as others have mentioned the water you fish can make a big difference. It can make you look like a hero, or a zero. To me it don’t much matter.
I like Fishwizard's post on Ty Webb. It's what it comes down to for some of us.
Edited by CiscoKid 6/9/2011 2:36 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | Travis, wasn't saying I was or wasn't a better fisherman...what would be interesting to me was more your claim that having more follows/fish contacted wouldn't correlate to more fish in the bag...to me, it does....
granted we fish differently, and you spend your time over open water and I'm a weedline/breakline guy...it's going to be a different ratio for us....
I don't buy the waters fished argument much...but that's a whole other discussion...
in any case... interesting perspectives by all....thx for posting
Edited by BNelson 6/9/2011 4:34 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | "I don't buy the waters fished argument much...but that's a whole other discussion..." It sure is... I can tell you with absolute certainty that I've encountered an area in Canada where the fish almost never follow and there's almost no reason to figure 8. Basically every contact is strike with a very high percentage in the boat. This is not just a couple times/years either, and the sample size is very large. In some of the water I fish in Wisconsin though, I would guess that I'm closer to 10 to 1. |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | I wasn't saying the waters fish don't matter on follows..it was more aimed at something else...no need to go there in this debate.
i agree, some waters (usually high pressure waters) you get more follows than strikes, less pressure = more strikes.
Edited by BNelson 6/9/2011 4:58 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1308
Location: WI | Last season we boated 33 fish out of 117 contacted (follows, lost, strikes). That covers 3 bodies of water and 315 hours of fishing. I think I only counted fish that were 30" and up when I totalled that.
Even on the same body of water, I've noticed lots of follows 2 years ago, and fewer last season. I think the weather had more of an affect on that than the fishing pressure. I think when it was warmer (higher metabolism?) they would just eat instead of follow.
Edited by JKahler 6/10/2011 4:19 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 4080
Location: Elko - Lake Vermilion | I don't see that a follow,... equates into a contacted fish ?
A contacted fish in my( Old School way of thinking )would be a fish that actually "Contacted" or "TOUCHED" my bait..........Follows just don't count.
When I was single just because Chicks "Followed" me didn't mean squat,.... The only ones that really counted were the ones that I "hooked "
Sorry for the different twist,.......But you guys that "Count" follows really need to chill out.......... or...... get some, once in a while. Remember..... it's just a fish.
Jerome
|
|
| |
|
Location: 31 | That's good Jerome! I love the comparison... I wish I made as many "contacts" with the girls back in my day as I have with the skis. LOL! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Top H2O - 6/10/2011 8:10 PM
Sorry for the different twist,.......But you guys that "Count" follows really need to chill out.......... or...... get some, once in a while. Remember..... it's just a fish.
Jerome
Couldn't agree more Jerome! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 378
Location: Michigan | The last two weekends have been horrible for landing fish, using mostly jerkbaits... Last weekend, 20 hours on the water, raised 16, contacted/hooked 9, boated 4. Yesterday, raised 12, contacted 8, boated 2. The fish are spawning or coming off the spawn, and they are curious but not hitting hard, if at all. They are slapping at baits... This is much worse than "normal", but I would still have to say 4:1 overall. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 112
Location: Nielsen's Fly-In Lodge, on Rowan Lake | Who cares just go fishin and have some fun !!!!!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1168
| Count me in the camp of wanting fish in the bag as opposed to sticking out my chest with a tattoo of the number of follows. A follow is a fish that didn't make it in the bag. To that fish your bait presentation wasn't good enough. The Pittsburgh Steelers aren't running around bragging about making it to the Super Bowl, they weren't good enough that day. Maybe just getting there is good enough if you are in Minnesota but it's about sealing the deal.
A few years back I severely altered the way I approach my time on the water. I broke away from the things that we all have read about fish location, where they should be in post frontal conditions, where they should be with wind blowing, etc. Those days I was consistently seeing fish all the time. When I changed I am no longer seeing as many fish but more are hitting the net. It's about working percentages. If you are on an edge where you have 20 muskies that are willing to follow but only 10% are willing to eat (that's 2 fish), is that better or worse than putting yourself on a different edge where you have 10 muskies but 40% (4 out of the 10 fish) are willing to eat? I began seeing fewer fish but more were making contact. I'll take the odds that work in my favor any day over what "should" work. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 829
Location: Maple Grove, MN | For me:
Follows to landed fish: about 15:1
Strikes to landed fish: about 4 to 1
I struggle at hook-sets sometimes.  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 785
| Don Pursch - 6/12/2011 4:09 PM
Who cares just go fishin and have some fun !!!!!
Well spoken |
|
| |
|
| i've heard the same thing from Paul Klein as what Travis is saying: "contacts" just doesn't correlate into caught fish over open water...so it's really comparing apples and oranges when comparing fish that behave differently in pretty different environments. pointless, really. for fish that are on/near structure i think it's self-evident that more "contacts" equals more caught fish. if you're not contacting fish it's most likely because you're doing something wrong; you can't catch what isn't there! start doing something right and you start seeing fish; start seeing fish and you'll start catching fish. sure, some of the fish you "contact" aren't interested in eating, but eventually you'll get some of them to go if you make the right moves. imho, when fishing on/near structure if i'm not seeing fish i think the stupidest thing i can do is to keep fishing the same way whether that's structure type, speed, depth, whatever. if the fish aren't showing it's not time to move spots, it's time to CHANGE. for example, on Saturday i was out for 4 hours and was only catching pike over the shallow weeds. i always assume that's a bad sign for muskies, so rather than moving and doing the same thing in a different spot, i pushed out to deeper water on the same spot and almost immediately raised a muskie. i know that's not exactly rocket science, but i think it's very easy to fall into the trap of fishing in the same kind of way, same kind of spot over and over and over and over..."the fish are going to eat my bucktail over 5' deep weeds or else!" hey, guess what, sometimes they aren't in the weeds in 5' of water. it's true that better fishermen definitely contact more fish and then they also convert a higher percentage of those contacts into catches. what's surprising or even interesting about that? most people understand the idea of working a progression to try and contact fish; i think the challenge that most of us face is limited time on the water on a given day or over the course of a year to get better at contacting and staying on fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | So where do lost muskies fall into this whole deal? 
Is it a follow, or is it a boated fish?
This all still boils down to waterbody you fish, and technique. Because both vary so much is the reason you see so many different answers here.
Edited by CiscoKid 6/13/2011 1:20 PM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | lost fish got into the you suck category....
yes, we get it Travis, you fish open water..neat. you don't get many follows...neat.
you also are missing out on chances at lots of big fish caught shallow too...
as I'm probably missing out on some opportunities over open water... 2 ways to get it done.
as to water body making a difference...to some degree yes, but it still boils down to the guys moving the most catch the most if they have half a clue...imo rarely is it the guys that come in and say "we didn't move any but caught 5"....as opposed to the guys that come in and say "we moved 20 and caught 5"....usually it's the latter...
if you look at the replies it looks like most are in the 5 follows for a fish in the boat ...which is what I have seen over about 5 yrs...and I fish on avg 15-20 bodies of water a year from metro lakes to potholes in vilas....
Edited by BNelson 6/13/2011 12:57 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | data is interesting and aids learning. take away the bias and consider the numbers and the source of the data and then either learn or not i guess. i'm one who doesn't keep track of much of anything but can draw from experience and comparing what i think my experiences are to the data presented gives me a gauge to compare to someone with more time and better developed skill ... it's a helpful gauge.
prior to learning some things from some experienced people (nelson on crank baits - herbie, cal and mikie boatside) i would say my confidence was neutral, now it's borderline cocky (i know that's hard to imagine) when a fish comes to the boat on a follow. there are more mechanics that have been converted to habits and i'd say from experience that my hit-rate has improved.
improving is a good thing especially when time goes away and opportunities are fewer than they were when i was a junkie.
still applaud those who go get their fix like smellie nellie and appreciate learning from it.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Point is it appears if someone gets way less follows to muskies boated you find it hard to be true. Not sure why other than it hurts your ego. You telling me that “it seems a bit fishy…” is basically questioning my character and word. What reason is there to not believe those numbers?
I don’t just fish suspended. I also hit deeper breaks so lump me into a structure fisherman as well. However, I still get very few follows compared to fish boated/lost there as well. Yep more than suspended but not drastically more. Like you I have a lot of multi fish days. Lots in the 3-6 fish per day range. Most of those days I either got zero follows, or less follows than fish boated. At least half of those days fishing breaks. Like I said earlier if I wanted to have follows I would switch how I am fishing. But to me follows do nothing. Going aggressive triggers or turns off fish usually. I am fine with not getting a follow if I had an interested fish turn away because they didn’t like my cranks ripped, or Hardhead ripped away from them. I don’t need to see that fish. Lots of people that don’t post on the boards have similar mentalities to me, and they also do not get a lot of follows but catch a lot of fish, and big fish. All with a similar technique.
No way to prove more follows equals more fish boated. Not unless you had the same people fishing the same lake(s) at the same time. Only then can you start comparing number of fish caught to the number of follows.
What is your follow to catch rate in WI compared to MN?
How about the follow to catch rate on public vs private waters?
Do see much difference in these, or do they all seem to be comparable (asking in an inquiring way and not a prick way)?
|
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | Travis what I thought was fishy is you said "a few follows a year" I took it literally, I'm sure you didn't mean it literrally as I have friends who have fished w you quite a bit and both of them told me after they did you had multiple (more than 2) follows every time they fished with you ....so my point was...you do get more than a few follows a year if you want me to spell it out for you....
I agree, that fishing suspended a fishermen will get less follows...as would you also agree you are probably on avg contacting less fish as well? or am I off base there too....?
my follow to catch rate is fairly constant on all lakes I fish...same in WI as MN....could be that I tend to fish the same way both places ....
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | Would your perception be different if I would have said 10 or 20 follows a year, but still said a 2:1 caught to follow ratio?
I don’t get a “bunch” or “ton” of follows. Don’t get “a lot” either. Therefore I get a “few”, which is more than “hardly any” and “no” follows. Being I don’t log anything, especially follows (which I never logged even though I use to keep a log) I can’t throw a number of follows out there, nor a number of caught fish for that matter. Therefore I use the terminology of “few” or the like, and most that fish with me get it. Sorry for being so vague.
 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | keeping in-mind that you do fish suspended right? ... just feeling the need to clarify. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | BNelson - 6/13/2011 1:26 PM
I agree, that fishing suspended a fishermen will get less follows...as would you also agree you are probably on avg contacting less fish as well? or am I off base there too....?
No way to prove I or anyone else is contacting less fish suspended/deep. There are lots of fishies out in that deep water, just like there are lots of fishies in the shallows. Many days (more than 3) where there sure is more than a coincidence that we mark a fish on the graph when you go to make the next cast. Can this be counted as a follow although we didn't see it?
|
|
| |
|
| I think question of the original poster was fairly clear. I don't understand why everyone (or a few people) feel the need to play devil's advocate all the time. What if this and what if that... It WAS a simple question. Way to beat it to death though. Why even contribute?
Edited by Anonymous 6/13/2011 1:51 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | jonnysled - 6/13/2011 1:45 PM
keeping in-mind that you do fish suspended right? ... just feeling the need to clarify.
Suspended the majority of the time just to clarify. Although you would have gotten that answer if you woul have read my first several posts. So what is your point? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 785
| I care I just like the personal reminder to have some fun, sometimes I get so worked up about this sport I forget what I'm out there for in the first place... which is to have fun lol. I've already had to remind myself this again and the season just started.
I agree the more fish you contact the more fish you will boat over the season. I do think the population density/pressure and time of day can affect the ratio though. I fish some water that is definately low density and when you boat 3 fish and have 2 follows on the day (a person could probably be more efficient but fishing with a normal intensity) I don't think your missing too terribly much on these lakes. I'm also not as hardcore in that I only really fish early morning and evening/night and kinda go napping during the day, and prime times the follows don't decrease so much as the strikes increase.
As mentioned already by others since I backed way off of certain baits my follows dropped as well, and strikes went up and my number of lost fish went from way to stinkin high to only a handful. That said you can't go back on fish you never seen. Also while the fish that crush baits are my favorites missing out on the nippers that are more likely to come off (but some won't) has greatly improved my loss to catch ratio but very possibly dropped the overall numbers so some obvious cons to this approach. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | Anonymous - 6/13/2011 1:49 PM
I think question of the original poster was fairly clear. I don't understand why everyone (or a few people) feel the need to play devil's advocate all the time. What if this and what if that... It WAS a simple question. Way to beat it to death though. Why even contribute?
Like |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | If you are going to come on as an Anon then why not call me out rather than saying “some people” as we all know it is me. I can handle it unlike Anon’s that can’t come on by their name and say how they feel about me.
Not playing devil’s advocate on this one. Just trying to understand, get more clarification, and explain my side of things that Nelson feels shouldn't even be considered.
He also asked if it could even be brought to a 1:1 ratio. Perhaps if some took my contributions as well as a few others to thought, then they could maybe get closer to that ratio. You need to ask questions and expound on even the simplest of questions to be able to start learning as there is always more to something than what initially appears.
So if you read most of my posts you may learn that going more erratic in nature, and possibly fishing deeper could bring down your ratio closer to a 1:1. That is if you can handle fewer follows in a day. Either that or get better at triggering fish.
Edited by CiscoKid 6/13/2011 2:11 PM
|
|
| |
|
| BNelson - 6/13/2011 1:26 PM
I have friends who have fished w you quite a bit and both of them told me after they did you had multiple (more than 2) follows every time they fished with you ....so my point was...you do get more than a few follows a year if you want me to spell it out for you....
. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | there are times i'd consider punting on 2nd down |
|
| |
