Tackle reviews

[MarkTheSpark]

Something in another thread prompted me to post separately on this issue. Is it just me, or do all tackle reviews start at 4 stars out of five and work upwards, and all tackle reviewers only ever get good gear?

I say this having reviewed a bit of tackle in my time, both in the days when I put together angling mags and later, when I got some freelance work with a mag.

Now, I can hold my head up high; I once went into print saying a rod rest and bite alarm were 'crap' and I can say with complete honesty I always got my misgivings about gear into print. Perhaps I was a little too kind sometimes and some benefit of the doubt was given.

I was asked to review some tackle for a mag a few years ago, when it appeared in print my criticism (of an extending fishing chair leg which kept collapsing) had been removed. When I asked why I was told it was because that particular chair leg was faulty, and that the other three legs worked (which was true).

But did the manufacturer have no chance to check what he was sending out for review? Isn't the point of reviews to identify inconsistent tackle?

I was also told by one editor that, when they came across crap tackle, they didn't review it. Why? Is that so the rest of us paying retail can find out for ourselves?

I'd be very interested to hear other anglers' views, particularly if they've bought something on the strength of a review and discovered it wasn't as described.

 

[Avon Aquatics - Ryan]

I agree to a certain point, as almost all magazine reviews are biased, especially ICYF and AT however, i find most reviews on FM to be pretty reliable on the whole. And i find a bit of common sense usually means that you get the product you need. (Reading reviews, looking at it in tackle shops etc)

Can't say it surprises me as almost all magazines get looked at by sponsor companies, any bad comments are quickly removed.

Ryan

 

[Poshpaul (Angling Trust and PaSC)]

Mark,

I suspect it may be the comment I made - (apologies if I'm wrong). All I can say is that this acquaintance, who I have known since he was a lad, a significant player in a world-wide major name tackle group, made the comment (some years back) about most magazines not publishing poor reviews because of the potential impact on advertising revenue.

Clearly the big players who place big adverts have a lot of clout - and I should imagine advertising directors and group owners get "a little twitchy" if they are aware of negativity to a big account.

Perhaps we should develop our critical skills and look for what is not mentioned in a review that we would normally expect to be there! Or, better still, develop good relationships with your local tackle dealer - who can be brutally honest about some of the new product range - and certainly on the ball about who gives the better aftersales services.

Poshers

 

[EC]

Magazibnes don't have too much space either, so does the editor review something that is kak or something that is 4 stars or better?

Howeveras already mentioned, there is the advertisers revenue to consider, no one is going to pee the advertisers off by givingthe 'new Xbrand barbel rod' average marks, let alone slatingthe product when they the manufacturersare stumping up £££s each month!

It justshows howvaluable and useful the review section on this site actually is, it's a pity more members don't add to it.

 

[Peter Jacobs]

Given the mutual reliability between advertisers and the media I never go by any review in the angling newspapers.

I'd far rather spend a lot more time going through the reviews on FM and then rely on the experienced and unbiased views of the contributors.

 

[Phil Lambert]

Guys, you are SO right! Looking at yesterday's AT, and in particular Martin Bowler's report on stret-pegging, is it just me or would I be right in thinking he is somehow linked to Okuma? He is always singing the praise of Okuma reels (normally the Epix Pro) and, although Okuma are a reliable make, there are better reels out there for the price. So it's not just the mags and papers pouring advert hype down our throats, it's the article writers too. Seems we're surrounded!! Absolutely agree - the FM reviews are based on anglers who have researched their purchases, bought the kit and are giving honest reviews. I certainly know that if I had spenthard earned cash on a lemon I'd make sure everyone knew!

 

[Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)]

Personally I think the way the so called "luminaries" such as Bowler and King Weasel promote their own brand of rubbish tackle is downright ridiculous.

As Phil says, there are better reels around, like Shimano and Diawa for instance.

 

[MarkTheSpark]

I've no problem with sponsored anglers plugging their brand - as long as it's obvious they are sponsored. We're intelligent enough to steer an opinion between the puff and the reality. On the other hand, I have known anglers who lie about tackle they've caught big fish on - and especially fibbed about the boilies.

And the comments about the FM reviews are also right - real anglers, paying real money for real tackle, then saying what they think about their latest purchase. I was reviewing tackle for years before someone asked me whether I would actually pay the price of a rod I'd reviewed. I had to admit I wouldn't. He then pointed out that rather rubbished my review, which said it was good, but neglected to say it was wildly over-priced. If you're not paying for the stuff, it's not easy to focus back on the real world.

 

[njb51]

It seemed as if the July issue of Coarse Fisherman was bought by Pallatrax!

I had to stop reading as it annoyed me so much where every other line was a plug towards some kind of Pallatrax product.

 

[Phil Lambert]

Jonny,

Fully concur.I used to thinkImprove Your Coarse Fishing was owned and run by Matt Hayes.

 

[Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC)]

My sentiments in my review herea few months ago.

Matt Hayes...SOD OFF! WE'VE HAD ENOUGH OF CROOKED TOOTHY GRIN AND YOUR SODDIN SHADES.

 

[Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)]

And what gets me are so called luminaries who haven't got a clue regarding angling terminology.

Bowler in this weeks Angling Times, describes what he calls "Stret Pegging".

It's nothing like stret pegging at all. What he is describing is more like laying on with a sliding lead. Sure it will catch fish, but it's not stret pegging.

 

[Laurie Harper]

A couple of points. Magazines receive far morethan they can actually review (doesn't only apply to angling mags - a friend edits a cycling mag and tells me it's the same there). Consequently, anything which is really rubbish doesn't even make it into print in the first place. So, if a magazine says something is OK, you can generally rely on it . Of course you must taste and try befiore you buy, as the saying goes - the fact that one person likes it doesn't mean you will.

Modern tackle is generally of a very high standard - for the money. There's still no escaping the fact that you do get what you pay for. Twas ever thus and it's no different now.

Ron. Agree with your comments about reels - I'm a confirmed Shimano fan. However, for the money, Okuma are perfectly decent reels and certainly as good as or better than many. Not everyone is fortunate enough to be able to afford Daiwa or Big S prices...

 

[Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)]

The best reviews I have experienced have been those by Digital Photo on photographic equipment. They are top class.

I must say that I have been using Shimano reels for over 30 years and personally they have never let me down. I have other reels of other makes which have. Even though they might cost more than others, Shimano are probably the cheapest reels around because they last.

 

[Ian Gemson]

I alway have a laugh when a so called top name angler rants and raves about a certain bait or brand of tackle, which he just happens to be sponsered by and when they get a better deal he rants and raves about the new sponsers products. An I being nieve LOL