Tackle reviews - do we trust them?

[Gary Newman]

Totally agree, if you asked 10 anglers what the best hook, line or bait was you'd probably get 10 different answers. A lot of fishing tackle comes down to personal preference and even just what you like to use (I love trotting using a pin, so i often do so even when a fixed spool reel might be better but i wouldn't enjoy myself so much).

 

[alan whittington]

I must say that tackle reviews in the weeklies are total hogwash in my view,the only good thing about any review is that it has told you the availability of an item for you to view and make an opinion for yourself(been caught too many times,and the mug signs worn off).

As for the inexperienced angler,you have either got to find a good tackle dealer with angling experience(which im sorry to say some have not),or ask someone nicely without disturbing their swim who is being successful where you fish for guidance on tackle,you may get some not being helpful then you you might get someone like myself who would meet you in the shop and help you decide(always pays to ask).

Just because the matchmen sounded like they were talking spanish doesnt mean they cant simplify it,because if you were to go into a group of experienced carp,barbel,fly or any other form of angling(sorry if i missed yours out),you would be in the same boat,but they couldnt half help out.

 

[Cakey]

Gary I know where your coming from about asking 10 anglers the best hook etc but I would only listen to the ones catching

 

[alan whittington]

Gary,thats absolutely true,but i would rather buy something that an experienced angler had used and liked,than believe the complete b******s printed in the comics,which are tantamount to lies to please the advertisers.

Cakey how did you get the smiley on the end,cos i tried and it went up by the heading(i dont want to ask the missus and get all the s**t).

 

[Gary Newman]

Alan,
Glad to hear that you have personally used all the items that are reviewed and are therefore able to make an informed judgement about the opinions formed by the reviewer, and that when you question their review you are doing so based on facts. Rather than doing so without any evidence and just a vague feeling that they might be saying that something is good when it isn't just to keep the advertiser happy.
I'm also glad to hear that all tackle dealers would sell a novice the product that is best for them, rather than the one that they have had in stock for ages and want to get rid of or the one that offers the biggest mark-up to them.
To my knowledge the reviews are carried out by experienced anglers (I've been fishing for 27 years and am one of the youngest writers for a weekly magazine, and most of the others have been fishing for longer)

In reader surveys, tackle reviews always come out near the top when it comes to the most popular sections of the magazine (along with where to fish), so we must be getting something right.

Cakey,
If you asked ten of the top anglers in the country you'd get different answers. Although that would probably be partly due to them all having different sponsorship deals!
In all seriousness though, my preference for much of my fishing is for a hook with an inturned point, but i know others who won't use anything but a straight point, and we all seem to catch fish.

 

[Cakey]

I used to fish with a heavily sponsored angler that use to roll his own baits but everytime he caught it was always on the sponsors bait.
so I dont trust them either

 

[alan whittington]

Gary,ive fished longer than you on several different sides of our sport and i will say only this,if i were to buy every item reviewed in the 'comics' that came out well in review i would be a very poor man and more importantly would have a house full of s**t,luckily i have the ability to look at the gear in the shops and make my own mind up,which is more helpful than saying that everything is good or brilliant,some reviews say that an item is good value for money when they know damn well that another is far superior for a better or similar price,and besides this if the reviewer believes that a **** item is good then maybe they should not be doing the job(saying that if they say its good often enough they have got to be right sometimes).When i read a review an item and it sounds good i like to look and a very disappointing job this turns out to be,the weeklies should be paying for my travel expenses because of the mis-information.

I tend to buy good quality tackle,with the price to go with it,but i know what a rod or reel is supposed to feel like cheap or not,or at least know where compromises have to be made.

 

[Gary Newman]

You do get a bit of that going on, i do wonder how many fish that were really caught on tiger nuts/maggots/etc are reported as being on X company's boilies.

When it comes to sponsored anglers though you'd actually expect their reviews to be more negative about a product than necessary, because they aren't allowed to review products from a company that they are a consultant for, so are reviewing stuff from their rivals.

If you give the same product to two different people they'll probably disagree on what is good/bad about it. For example, this season I've been catching some fairly big tench on a particular hook and recommended it to a friend. Now out of over 140 takes I've only had three hook pulls, but he had that many the first afternoon that he used them! If he'd been an anger who'd read my column where i recommended them, rather than a mate who knows that I have actually been using them, then he could easily have thought that they were rubbish and i hadn't been truthful with my recommendation and hadn't really been catching on them.

 

[alan whittington]

Thats understandable Gary for your friend may have a totally differerent fish playing technique or use lines,rods,reels or even rigs which differ to yours and put strains on the hookhold,but some of the other things that are printed are awful.

 

[Gary Newman]

Alan,
I can only comment for myself and I'm not trying to get in a row with you or be awkward, but when you say that all reviews are rubbish and reviewers are biased, and as someone who does review tackle in the weeklies i feel that you're including me in this and feel that i have to defend myself, as I'm sure you would in the same position.
I do a lot of fishing myself, most weekends and often 3 or 4 overnighters between work, so i do spend a fair amount of time on the bank. I also fish for virtually every coarse species and also do a fair amount abroad now. I'm 32 years old so won't be as experienced as some who have been around longer and have been doing it for more years.

I can honestly say that I've never given a good review to something that i thought was rubbish, and would refuse to review something if i thought it was no good and there was no way of saying so in the review. I've also written negative reviews and had them printed. Obviously you only have my word on this.

The point i was trying to make with the hooks was that what works for one person won't work for someone else. Same goes for hi-tech lines, if you're heavy-handed you'll have trouble with them.

I don't know you, but it sounds like you're an experienced angler, but there are plenty that aren't and that need some advice on what is worth a look, but it is still down to them to go and have a play with the item in a tackle shop - i wouldn't buy a rod or reel without handling it first (in the same way as i wouldn't buy a car without a test drive, but I'd read a few reviews on one first to narrow down my choice).

 

[MarkTheSpark]

I do a fair amount of reviewing of products and if anyone thinks that I'd risk my reputation by recommending something that is rubbish then they are very wrong, and I'm sure the same goes for other reviewers.
I submit my reviews and it is then up to the magazine editor whether or not he uses them - if i have really slated something from someone who spends a fortune advertising with the magazine then it may be that they decide not to use it - i certainly wouldn't change it or tone it down just to keep people happy.
On another note, why waste space telling people that something is no good, when you could use that space to point them in the direction of something that is worth buying.
The other thing to consider is the amount of time that the reviewer gets with the product as I've had things before that have been great for the first six months that I've had them and have then gone wrong. I fish more than most so things do get a good try out and I've also been involved in being a consultant for various tackle firms over the years so am used to trying to find faults with things (as i would do with a new product before it comes out).
There is always going to be a certain amount of bias, purely down to personal preferences and even down to what manufacturer you've used a lot of products from over the years that you've been happy with.

.
But there's the problem, Gary. The point of reviewing bad kit is so we ordinary blokes don't get tripped up. As you cannot possibly review more than a small percentage of tackle, the opportunities for manufacturers to get away with selling **** are legion.
And, if you have slated something in review, give us the evidence...

 

[Gary Newman]

There is only so much space in the magazine each week for product reviews, which is why we tend to look at the products that are worth buying rather than those that aren't.
You also have to differentiate in magazines between products that have actually been reviewed (in AM we have User Reports and First Trial) and the new ones which we are simply telling people that have come out (in AM this is called New Gear and is a description of what the product is and a rating based on our first impressions of it, not something that has been used on the bank).

As for an example of a bad product review - I can't remember the exact issue date off the top of my head - but i recently did one on a Maver line marker that was pretty rubbish and overpriced (but not totally useless as it had alternative purposes such as changing the colour of your float tip), basically a paint pen that had been renamed, which i gave 4 or 5 out of 10, and it was printed.
I have also had plenty of products that i haven't ended up reviewing on the basis of them being no good.

The other thing to consider is this, if a product is rubbish then why am i going to use my already limited fishing time to go out and fish with something that i know is no good and is going to cost me fish? All my reviews are done in my own time and i don't get paid anything for them!

 

[Chris Season32]

Gary please don't assume that comments regarding the integrity of reviews are aimed at yourself solely, you've already mentioned that the final say over content is down to the editorial team. I really think you are making a rod for your own back by defending the content so fervently, we're not stupid, while your own intentions may be good the final product says it all. If the published reviews were just a little/occasionally biased/influenced/pro-sponsor I'm sure we'd cut the publications some slack and live with it. As it stands however, its an insult to the buyers inteligence and no amount of wriggling will change that.

Are you saying you get no reward for writing these reviews, or just not a financial one?

 

[Les Clark 3]

Fair play Woody, but that wasn`t the question : Tackle reveiws- do we Trust Them ?
My answer to that question is , it depends where the reveiw comes from , and in the main , for me no I don`t trust them .

---------- Post added at 18:04 ---------- Previous post was at 17:57 ----------

Oop`s look`s like I missed a few posts out before replying to Woodys .

 

[alan whittington]

Gary in reply to your earlier post,i dont know you either,so this definitely not an attack on your own integrity,what it is is an attack on the angling press's integrity,which it lost many years ago,let me tell you that i had a faulty item of tackle from a major manufacturer(P.Innov.),i complained to my t.dealer,the company by e.mail,personal letter and phone and got no satisfaction(this was on a product that was accepted to be manufactured incorrectly),in my attempt to get some joy i wrote to both weeklies and got the same reply,basically they are not here to print complaints,i replied that how are future customers going to know what they are letting themselves in for,basically they dont give a toss,so at the age of 54(now 55) i said that i shall buy these 'rags' no more(been buying them since 1970).As i said earlier without knowing what you are looking at your better off asking someone who does,which doesnt mean me just anyone who does have knowledge of the sort of fishing this person plans to do,they might bump into you or me Gary i'd like to think they would be welcome either way.

 

[rookie_fly_guy]

Sorry to stick my oar in, but Alan, if you have a defective product then you are protected under your statutory rights, specifically that of satisfactory quality. If the tackle dealer wouldn't replace or refund the item then there are a whole shed load of legal steps you can take from there and as the retailer its their job to take it back then take things up with the manufacturer.

And from a business point of view I can understand if a paper didn't want to publish one complaint and risk losing a fair bit of advertising revenue. On the flip side if loads of people were complaining about a specific product then I think an angling magazine would have a duty to let its readers know that an item was dodgy.

 

[alan whittington]

Im sorry Krian,i should have said it is now resolved,what your saying about the angling press not being obligated to print such a letter(this was not a letter full of insults,i was just asking for an answer from the company concerned,which this particular company do not feel obligated to supply,no customer services dept. you see),no they probably are'nt but they used to,regularly,now they are only interested in kissing the advertisers butt and to hell with the reader.

 

[rookie_fly_guy]

Fair do's alan, I just like playing devils advocate I personally have never read an angling paper or magazine (unless it was in the doctors office at some point) so I didn't know whether or not they did or used to do a letters section, I prefer to get all of my info on fishing off of sites like this one.

But I imagine that's another reason why a huge amount of magazines, not just the anglers ones, are kissing advertising ass, as people turn to the internet and stop paying for magazines I imagine it gets harder and harder to get advertising revenue. So I imagine that if I was an editor I'd be very concerned if a piece done by one of my writers was going to pee off the P.R. manager at someone who gives me huge chunks of money each month, versus losing out on one or two readers.

(Not that im condoning writing reviews that skim over the bad points on tackle, just pointing out that from a strictly financial decission it kinda makes short term sense)

****

Quick plus point, although there are lots of companies that do provide a cust. serv dept for the public, there are also lots who don't, simply because legally you complain to the retailer about goods, they can then go back and complain to whoever they buy off of, either the wholesaler or manufacturer, and if you don't get a refund, repair or replacement its the retailer you take to court for breaching your statutory rights, not the wholesaler/manufacturer.

 

[Ray Daywalker Clarke]

Ask yourself,
Would you buy anything from a tackle shop witout reading a reveiw, or getting feed back from friends FM members etc, I wouldn't.

Now having said that, I bought a Bivvy, read the reveiws, looked at the product, what a let down, it's great for he summer, but rubbish for winter, but thats not what was written about it, plus it weighs a ton.

The press have to give a fair reveiw, but I think we should also be warned about the rubbish on the market, after all, they tell us about the good stuff.

 

[Cakey]

Ive always said a way out of it for a mag or paper is to review an item by its "named angler" then give it a everyday day angler for a down to earth review which if its a bad review is not down to the mag or paper