|
|
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | This is a discussion my fishing buddies and I have had numerous times. What best reflects the difficulties in musky fishing. I.E. in a tourney how should it be scored. It is done many different ways out there.
Personally, I think big fish should be worth more points. But is that adding two much luck into the equation. Should a 50” fish be worth more points than two 34” fish in a big dollar tourney.
I was in one tourney where a team got 4 fish with a 35 inch average. They beat a team that got 3 fish with a 41 inch average. It was a straight inch or fraction there of equals points tourney. If they would have used the Hodag system of - Legal fish equals 30 points and each ¼ inch over legal is equal to one more point, the team with the 41” average would have won.
If multiple fish are being caught it is a easy question for me, but what about tourneys where lower numbers are caught.
What do you guys prefer, a straight inch point system or a weighted system for big fish?
Nail A Pig!
Mike
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 691
Location: nationwide | I will probably be alone on this one but I have always liked the longest fish wins concept. It keeps everybody in the hunt until the very end.
Corey Meyer |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8781
| I don't really understand the scoring systems enough to be sure what I'm talking about here, but I can say this:
I've fished some small local tournaments where 70 or so teams may catch a total of 6 fish in a day. In that respect? Two fish of any size is a pretty good accomplishment!
But then two 30" fish doesn't stack up in my opinion to one 52" fish.
I think a weighted system makes sense. But basing it on whether the fish is "legal" opens up a can of worms in WI because so many lakes have so many different size limits.
Maybe have a system where a fish under 30" is .75 points per inch, 30" - 40" is 1 point, 40" - 50" is 1.25 points or something like that???
Like I said I don't know enough about it, but I can see both sides. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2427
Location: Ft. Wayne Indiana | I am totally against putting them on a scale.
I like having a set number of points for a legal fish, and then something like 1 point for every inch over that.
Legal fish: 36 inches = 6 points
Fish Caught: 38 inches 6+2= 8 points
45 incher: 6+9=15 points
One 45 incher is better than two 36 inchers.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | The 'weighted' system Mike R. is talking about is basically the Muskies Inc scoring method; nothing to do with a scale. Use a base size, like 30 or 34 or 40 inches, and add a set of points for each 1/4 inch or 1 inch or whatever. This system allows a large fish points total to be hard to catch up to with two smaller fish. As an example, the MMT event this weekend shows three 40" class fish losing to one 40" class fish and a 51.
If the set points for a 40" legal fish is 6, and each 1/4 inch over is worth 1 point, a 51 is worth 50 points, two 42" fish are worth 28, and a third would give you 42.
Set it up 1 point per half inch, and you have the 51 at 28 points and two 42's at 20. Aother 42 would give you 30 and beat the 51. The more value per fragment of an inch, the more weighted the system is to very long fish. If the 'goal' is to reflect what is considered 'desireable' by the average muskie angler, then some advantage should go to larger fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | Weighted system(similar to the PMTT or the Petenwell Challenge) would be the way I'd run one. Benefits the dudes on big fish, which is nice. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 734
Location: Watertown, MN | I like the weighted system, catching big fish is always the goal, which day do you prefer a 3 fish in low 40's, or 2 fish with one being a 51". I think most would take the 2 fish day. The weighted system really gets interesting when a qualifying fish is 30", because a big fish is huge in the pt system. Cave Run a 50" fish would be 110 pts and 3 31" fish would only be 102 pts, I would say the 50 was a heck of an accomplishment, but so is 3 31". Hartmans events actually give additional bonus pts for fish over 48".
The weighted system kind of follows the other big trails scoring system. A angler only scores 2 fish 8 and 6 lb (bass or walleye), the rest of the field brings their limit of 5 fish in 1-2lb range, who would be in first. That is the decision you need to make in fishing the event chase big fish, or numbers, end of day swing for the fence and chase a biggun.
Troyz
|
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | A weighted system is best. The PMTT system is WAY better than the WMT system.
Two 34's should not beat a big fish (48" or greater).
The people that stick the big fish need to be rewarded for their accomplishment. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | As long as the fish aren't transported any system is fine with me, but I would lean toward the weighted system as well.
Mike |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | To me catching a pair of 34's shows that anglers found a pattern...why should they be penalized because somebody "lucked" into a 45"? |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | so catching two 34's is an absolute pattern? maybe they lucked into those too as you put it....? tourneys are alot of luck to begin with...the anglers that catch bigger fish should be rewarded...two 34's should not be worth more than one 45...just my opinion |
|
| |
|
Posts: 382
| No way two 34" is equal to 45". As for defining a pattern, ANYBODY with a baitcaster and rizzo tail can get two 34"s fishing shallow weeds. Regardless of time of year there will be dink fish in the weeds. Hard to reward folks for targeting dink fish. Even in WI a 45" is heck of lot harder to get than two 34"s. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8781
| I guess it equals out somewhere along the like -- two 34's aren't equal to a 48, but two 45's sure as hell beats a 50 in my opinion.
And what if someone gets 4 really small fish?
How does that compare to the guy who just threw a lucky cast and got a 51?
What if it were based on the average weight per inch of fish? If the average 40" fish weighs 17 pounds, for example, than two 40's would give you 34 points. Someone with a single fish that would average 35 pounds for its length would beat that, as would someone with enough 34" fish to have a total combined weight of over 34 pounds...
That seem to be the most "fair" method I can think of without actually weighing the fish like they do in bass tournaments.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | addict,
The system in use in many events was designed to 'weight' the larger fish originally to avoid weighing and the associated additional handling, at least in part.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 734
Location: Watertown, MN | 2 45 would beat a 50" fish. Luck can play a huge part in any tournament. 1 Lucky cast could land you the 51, so maybe the angler threw 2 lucky cast and got a 42 and 41 fish. Catching 1 or 2 fish can be luck or skill, 2 fish to me is no established pattern. What happens to the guys that catches 10+ short fish(happened in a event). To me they were the best team at catching fishing, had the best pattern, but just had the wrong fish patterned.
Troyz |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | And good 'luck' is largely a reflection of any angler's skill level, at the end of the day you make your own.....  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8781
| That's why I like the trail(s) Anybody can stumble on a big fish, or a few small fish. But to do it enough times to make it to the champoinship and place in that championship?
That's more skill than blind luck. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 5874
| Straight length method. Let the most inches win. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | John, I don’t want to turn this in to a transport vs. nontransport issue, but all the things you pointed out that where bad about the SF video can and do also happen in transport tourneys, with the addition of extra possible problems areas, specifically the placing in the livewell, the transport, and the removal from the livewell, (of a possible revived fish, that now needs to be laid on a board for measurement).
I have and do fish both types of tourneys feel both can be good and both can be bad, depending on the organizers and the fishermen. In my opinion where transport tourneys fail, is when they are used as an augment against size limit increases, when State Fisheries Managers are for the increases and feel they are biologically sounds.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1937
Location: Black Creek, WI | esoxaddict - 9/26/2006 1:55 PM
How does that compare to the guy who just threw a lucky cast and got a 51?
How do you determine if that cast was LUCKY or based on SKILL?
I guess I don't have a strong opinion in regard to scoring. To me... catching multiple fish is an accomplishment worth rewarding. I also feel catching BIG fish is an accomplishment as well. Which one is a greater accomplishment is a tough call.
Going back to the luck factor.... that's why I like MORE TIME. The need to be consistent, in my opinion, helps reduce the impact of LUCK. Trails help establish consistency.... but I'd like to see more time added to 2 day events and maybe even see some 3 day events. The SF 5 day elimination format is awesome... but who has the TIME to do several of these in season? One day events? Well... ya better hope you got some luck... because those "one hit wonders" can... and often do.... place high in those.
I also really liked Nelson's format. The idea of having no idea what lake you are going to fish until the night before is really cool... and even eliminates the need or benefit of "prefishing". An awesome format for a weekend warrior such as myself.
But... to answer MRobert's question directly.... I'd favor the weighted scoring system if I had to. At least with that format as time dwindles and you are down by 2 fish... you can "swing for the fence" and hope you get lucky with one big fish (heh heh). |
|
| |
|
Posts: 5171
| I think the PMTT has the best scoring,it has a combo of both.At eagle river a 37,34 beat a 46 incher.A 46 incher than beat 35,35.I think they have the best system by far.I also would like to add the Muskie Inc. scoring system is horrible.I fished a tourney once where a guide on a lake had 4, 30ish inch fish and lost to someone in the last hour to a 47 inch fish,brutal.bill
Edited by 0723 9/27/2006 3:54 PM
|
|
| |
|
| I don't fsh tourneys, but to me, when there might only be as few and 8-12 fish caught in a given tourney it seems rather arbitrary to give the money to the guy that was either flat-out lucky catch the largest, or had lots of time to pre-fish and had scoped out a fish fish and sat on it intil it ate. To me, three smaller fish still says more about a team that probably found a pattern and worked it into nuimbers, than one team the probably just got lucky. If you don't like 3 30 inchers winning than just set a higher bar. Seesm like this is less of an issue in MN where the legal size is 40. 3 40's is clearly better to me than one fifty. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2515
Location: Waukesha & Land O Lakes, WI | "so catching two 34's is an absolute pattern? maybe they lucked into those too as you put it....? tourneys are alot of luck to begin with...the anglers that catch bigger fish should be rewarded...two 34's should not be worth more than one 45...just my opinion"
Not an absolute pattern but more of one than happening on one fish. On trails like the WMT and IMTT guys are done after 2 fish are registered. Two legals musky in one tourny day is greater than 1 legal, no matter how big it is....People saying catching 2 legals in one tourny isn't that great of a feat, probally haven't done it.
What's the magic number that 2 legals (34") doesn't beat? 40"? On LVD the limit is 40", would 2 40" beat one 50??
Edited by Gander Mt Guide 9/27/2006 11:48 AM
|
|
| |
|
| Say what you want about Wisconsin fishing as it relates to size, but if you look at the WMT results by lake, VERY few 50s are caught. Very few upper 40s are even caught. With all those good anglers fishing some of the state's best waters.....proves to me that fishing for big fish is not worth your "tournament" time.
I don't really like tournaments to begin with, but they're set up to be a numbers game. A pair of fish in the low/mid 30s every weekend would get you in the money. The team who catches a 47"er doesn't place (aside from maybe a big fish prize).....just seems wrong. |
|
| |
