Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

[tonybull]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

Makes you wonder, there's only one photo of Martin holding a Carp, the big one. No photo's of him holding the smaller Carp, only photo's of Carp laying on the grass with the rod next to them

His wife took the photo, so why did she not take any photo's of him holding the other fish ? was she only with him on the one occasion he caught the big one ?

Either :

1, On holiday in Canada and sat with him while he fished and caught the big Carp and took the photo ?
or
2, He caught the big Carp local to his home in Essex and she nipped down and took the photo ?

There is never a mention of Martins wife fishing with him on any of his trips in England.

Does anyone know why she was there to take the photo of the big Carp ?

 

[Cliff Hatton]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

The section in bold, below, is what I wrote a few days ago

To Paul Selman: as I've said repeatedly just recently, if Martin was staying under the same roof as his relatives for two and a half weeks and had been witnessed returning home 'white and visibly shaking' after seeing some big fish, JamesN should be able to report that Martin's nephew, Nate, ALSO saw his uncle come home beaming with joy after catching some of those big fish: you can't have one without the other.

On page 14 Paul Selman replied with this in his usual ill-conceived way. Look at the 'quote'. The 'quote' is from JamesN. It is NOT from anyone in Martin's family. Yet again, Selman blunders around with a rash, baseless decree in the hope that some of it will stick. And, perfectly predictably, he introduces - then plays upon - another ridiculous diversion in order to take the heat off. Have a read...


"POPPYCOCK HATTON!

This is what his family said to James N: My neighbour (Nate) told me that he remembered his uncle walking into the house after the walk and he was white and visibly shaken stating he had just seen lots and lots of massive carp, nothing like he had ever seen before. He immediately went to the local hardware store and bought some tackle and went fishing for them. He spent the rest of the holiday there and caught lots of big fish.

As usual, you read what you want to read Cliff/or is it Nobby?"

The 'quote' you have just read is James's isn't it? Martin's family have said nothing ; we only have JamesN's word for it and Selman knows this...

 

[tonybull]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

Makes you wonder, there's only one photo of Martin holding a Carp, the big one. No photo's of him holding the smaller Carp, only photo's of Carp laying on the grass with the rod next to them

His wife took the photo, so why did she not take any photo's of him holding the other fish ? was she only with him on the one occasion he caught the big one ?

Either :

1, On holiday in Canada and sat with him while he fished and caught the big Carp and took the photo ?
or
2, He caught the big Carp local to his home in Essex and she nipped down and took the photo ?

There is never a mention of Martins wife fishing with him on any of his trips in England.

Does anyone know why she was there to take the photo of the big Carp ?

Cliff

How about answering my post instead of side stepping it ? if you keep on ignoring members posts, it will reflect on you as not being interested in the real truth but more of a personal issue with Paul S.

 

[thecrow]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

Cliff

How about answering my post instead of side stepping it ? if you keep on ignoring members posts, it will reflect on you as not being interested in the real truth but more of a personal issue with Paul S.

I believe it already has.

I doubt that many that have posted on this and the other thread give a flying **** about the squabble with PS and the CS they are only interested in if the fish was caught in England or some other foreign country.

For me there are 2 scenarios

1) the fish were indeed caught in Canada and MG seized upon an opportunity to as GE put it "cock a snook" at the modern Carp scene.

2) the fish was caught from a water that was private and fishing was not allowed, as above the opportunity to rub noses in it was one that MG could not resist.

Mg has already been shown to have disliked the methods used by the Carp anglers of the day, he has also been shown to have been economical with the truth in so far as he did not record the weight of the fish accurately, it seems incredulous to me that he believed that 48lb would be believed more than 50lb.

 

[bennygesserit]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

Please I don't want to read the phrase white and visibly shaken again

Cliff you need to talk to Martins family in Canada if that's inappropriate then I suggest this entire series of threads might be too

 

[no-one in particular]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

The section in bold, below, is what I wrote a few days ago



The 'quote' you have just read is James's isn't it? Martin's family have said nothing ; we only have JamesN's word for it and Selman knows this...

The problem is you were not there on holiday with Martin , his relatives were. For you to think you know more than them is bit ingenious. He never told you or Eddie even if he fished or did not fish in Canada full stop.
You have oft stated the trembling as evidence they are lying-Martin may have been trembling at the first discovery of all these fish and when he caught the big one he played down his excitement the second time round because he did not want to draw any more attention to it because he decided when he got back to England he was going to pass this off as an English fish. Is that not possible?
Also I find it strange that his relatives would lie in favor of the possibility of the fish being caught in Canada as this would not look good for their uncle. You would think if they were going to lie, it would be the other way round and state he never fished while on holiday with them to defend their uncle..
And you have said Eddie and yourself can not be expected to remember everything exactly from something that happened 25 years ago, could you grant two young relatives the possibility that they cannot be expected also to remember every exact detail from 25 years ago.
The fact is this witnessed action is most likely to be true.

 

[Cliff Hatton]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

Crow said: "I doubt that many that have posted on this and the other thread give a flying **** about the squabble with PS and the CS they are only interested in if the fish was caught in England or some other foreign country"


I suspect you're right, Crow, but in order to achieve some kind of meaningful verdict it is essential to expose the fabrication woven by Paul Selman;not to do so could lead to some believing the fish were caught in Canada. Fortunately, Paul Selman does an outstanding job of discrediting both himself and his story. Barely a word he says passes the truth and credibility test

 

[Lord Paul of Sheffield]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

There might be a simple way to solve this - If Eddie thinks he knows the water that the carp was from and if it's in England why doesn't he go there and see if the water still hold big carp?

If he finds he water and there are still big carp there then if the water is private and no fishing allowed - name it - the water can't be fished by anyone so the carp will not be over fished and even if MG is criticised for fishing there at least his claim of a big English carp will be proved true

If there are no big carp there now then no problem - he can name the water

If the water is now open to the general public fishing then if there are big carp still, again no problem as people will already be fishing for them

 

[thecrow]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

in order to achieve some kind of meaningful verdict it is essential to expose the fabrication woven by Paul Selman;not to do so could lead to some believing the fish were caught in Canada

As has been said before disproving the PS/CS claims does not prove the claim that MG caught the fish in England, sorry to be blunt about someone that was a friend of yours and Eddies but MG was a liar that sought publicity for this fish in order to (in his mind) rub the noses of the Carp scene of the day into the dirt.

 

[no-one in particular]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

Crow said: "I doubt that many that have posted on this and the other thread give a flying **** about the squabble with PS and the CS they are only interested in if the fish was caught in England or some other foreign country"


I suspect you're right, Crow, but in order to achieve some kind of meaningful verdict it is essential to expose the fabrication woven by Paul Selman;not to do so could lead to some believing the fish were caught in Canada. Fortunately, Paul Selman does an outstanding job of discrediting both himself and his story. Barely a word he says passes the truth and credibility test

The fact is Paul Selman may have made some wild guesses as to the back ground of the pictures to support his theory. But that does not exclude the possibility of the fish being caught in Lake Ontario. It is a truly massive lake with thousands of creeks, bay, rivers, backgrounds etc. In fact the carp are more likely to be found in one of the sheltered bays as I have read and they appear to be plentiful and big. . Where in England are you likely to you happen upon 50lb + fish? **** Walker took a very long time to locate a 40+ fish and catch it in the day.
There are also plenty of varied back grounds on lake Ontario. Most of it is rocky shore line with trees but with so much variation over a huge area; grassy banks, fences and signs are a distinct possibility. There are hundreds of chartered fishing boats, kayaking in the sheltered bays mainly, sailing clubs etc. Any one of these could be fenced of with a sign on it. Maybe even Ontario Sailing or Ontario Kayaking club written on it with any number of objects stacked behind it.
Any one of these bays could look English, not many at a guess but with such a vast array of backgrounds its not hard to surmise some of them could look English with any discriminating evidence erased.
There are also some carp tackle outfitters as they call them in Canada, but it would not be hard to surmise that there would have been a few around the vicinity the lake Ontario at that time. If near where Martin was staying in 1990 I do not know but on balance it would seem it would not be difficult or at least not beyond possible.

 

[tonybull]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

The fact is Paul Selman may have made some wild guesses as to the back ground of the pictures to support his theory. But that does not exclude the possibility of the fish being caught in Lake Ontario. It is a truly massive lake with thousands of creeks, bay, rivers, backgrounds etc. In fact the carp are more likely to be found in one of the sheltered bays as I have read and they appear to be plentiful and big. . Where in England are you likely to you happen upon 50lb + fish? **** Walker took a very long time to locate a 40+ fish and catch it in the day.
There are also plenty of varied back grounds on lake Ontario. Most of it is rocky shore line with trees but with so much variation over a huge area; grassy banks, fences and signs are a distinct possibility. There are hundreds of chartered fishing boats, kayaking in the sheltered bays mainly, sailing clubs etc. Any one of these could be fenced of with a sign on it. Maybe even Ontario Sailing or Ontario Kayaking club written on it with any number of objects stacked behind it.
Any one of these bays could look English, not many at a guess but with such a vast array of backgrounds its not hard to surmise some of them could look English with any discriminating evidence erased.
There are also some carp tackle outfitters as they call them in Canada, but it would not be hard to surmise that there would have been a few around the vicinity the lake Ontario at that time. If near where Martin was staying in 1990 I do not know but on balance it would seem it would not be difficult or at least not beyond possible.

Good post and just what was needed so people can see why it is possible the big Carp could of been caught in Canada.

 

[Philip]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

Yes great post. especially this bit....

The fact is Paul Selman may have made some wild guesses as to the back ground of the pictures to support his theory. But that does not exclude the possibility of the fish being caught in Lake Ontario

Eddie and Mr Hatton seem either unable or unwilling to entertain that as a possibility. Perhaps they still know something we dont.

Unfortunately Mr Hatton is once again reverting to his default position of crowbarring the thread back to PS & the CS and, worse, ignoring the posts and questions he does not like…i.e anything and everything regarding the contents & location of the unedited photos. I will try again…


1. Do you have any idea were the unedited potos are now Mr Hatton ?

2. What is your best guess at the objects stacked up in the background of the photos? …you already suggested they were Canoes on another web site.

...I dont think asking for a best guess is unreasonble is it !


And here are two Eddie has missed :


1. What happened between the 21st October when you told me you did not know were the water was and the 20th December when you told Crow you believed you knew were the water was ?

2. You seemed to suggest you may have photos of the chain link fence that appears in the unedited photos (post#114) Do you have photos of the chain link fence Eddie ?

 

[Ray Daywalker Clarke]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

Why don't the pedants and non believers get over the fact that despite the lack of irrefutable, concrete evidence the balance of information indicates the fish were indeed caught in the UK. Is this the high court all of a sudden?
Here's a concept, why don't Philip, Paul1, Ray et al provide proof,concrete evidence etc that these captures were made overseas? If you're so sure then put up your information instead of smearing two more posters on this subject.
Selman, here's a friendly tip, when in a hole stop digging. You've embarrassed yourself with your about face contradictions and need to sit back and reflect on your input here.
Or should I just write "censored off' as is permitted on FW forum?

It's been said, I don't need to Prove a thing, i am not the one claiming this is an Historical Catch, which we all know it isn't.

You have your opinion, I have mine. I have asked many times, name the water, show the photo's. All we get is, we don't know the water. Then, i think i know the water, well which is it ???

The photo's have been disposed of, then it's, we don't know whats happened to the photo's, and to top it all, there are un edited photo's, again, Which is it.

Your opinion is based on what you have read, same as those who have doubts. If Eddie and Cliff can not give 100% proof, then as far as i am concerned, the fish came from Canada, because it can't be proved otherwise, can it.

If Martin didn't want to claim a record, there is nothing wrong with that at all. Once you start cutting backgrounds from photo's, IMO, it is more than just to protect the fish and venue. When Martin caught those fish, and with his experience, he would have had those photo's taken from a different angle, hiding as much of the background as possible, thats if he wanted to protect the venue and fish. That would have been in his mind at the time. He also wouldn't have gone running round telling people and showing photo's. Then cutting the photo;s after showing them. Something doesn't add up.

Like everyone else, we just want the proof, the facts. NOT heresy.

Name the water, show the photo's….It is that simple.

If not, then it's just a fishy tale.

 

[tonybull]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

There might be a simple way to solve this - If Eddie thinks he knows the water that the carp was from and if it's in England why doesn't he go there and see if the water still hold big carp?

If he finds he water and there are still big carp there then if the water is private and no fishing allowed - name it - the water can't be fished by anyone so the carp will not be over fished and even if MG is criticised for fishing there at least his claim of a big English carp will be proved true

If there are no big carp there now then no problem - he can name the water

If the water is now open to the general public fishing then if there are big carp still, again no problem as people will already be fishing for them

Another good post that will get Ignored

 

[Ray Daywalker Clarke]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

There might be a simple way to solve this - If Eddie thinks he knows the water that the carp was from and if it's in England why doesn't he go there and see if the water still hold big carp?

If he finds he water and there are still big carp there then if the water is private and no fishing allowed - name it - the water can't be fished by anyone so the carp will not be over fished and even if MG is criticised for fishing there at least his claim of a big English carp will be proved true

If there are no big carp there now then no problem - he can name the water

If the water is now open to the general public fishing then if there are big carp still, again no problem as people will already be fishing for them

Good point,

If it was open to the public, i think we would know the venue by now.

But then again, who goes to Canada, for a days fishing

 

[chub_on_the_block]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

I thought i read somewhere in this thread (or maybe the other one) that a candidate water in the UK (if catches were made here) was suggested - Hanningfield Reservoir in Essex. This is (and has always been?), Trout only. This fitted the bill as a large expanse of water with a nearby road and within striking distance apparently of where MG lived. The secrecy could be explained by what amounts to illegal poaching.

Having said that, i think the balance of probability in my opinion would be somewhere in Canada where a virgin water was more likely to hold a stock of large fish ripe for plunder. I would imagine a large Reservoir to be hard - and not to yield so many big fish in quick succession. I am not, and have never been, a carp fanatic so I have little interest either way. However, the intrigue and possible deceptions described in this thread have made for a good read (well up to a point).

 

[itsfishingnotcatching]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

Like everyone else, we just want the proof, the facts. NOT heresy

Absolute quality Ray

 

[tonybull]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

Wonder what would be worse in the eyes of the proper Carp anglers ?

1, Caught in Canada but claiming an English lake ?

2, Caught on a fishery that was Trout only fishing ?

 

[Ray Daywalker Clarke]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

Wonder what would be worse in the eyes of the proper Carp anglers ?

1, Caught in Canada but claiming an English lake ?

2, Caught on a fishery that was Trout only fishing ?

Either way, this could well be the reason the photo's have been disposed of.

What ever that may mean.

 

[Nobby C (ACA)]

Re: Martin Gay's Historic Carp Captures - THIS is 'Overwhelming Evidence'...

OK Phillip,if you consider my post as name calling I apollgise for any offence. I just thought it ironic how you stated "correction, I'm not pedantic" or some such, it made m smile, I should have put a smiley or what haveyou.