your thoughts please on......

D

DANNY BOY SMITH

Guest
what about the shocking articull in this weeks angling mail,
about the record barbel! how it seems to have been cought by two different anglers at to very different weights so your thoughts please ..........
 
D

DANNY BOY SMITH

Guest
i am sure some out spoken b.s angler out there may have some kind of comments on this !
so dont keep them to your self share with us all........
 
D

DANNY BOY SMITH

Guest
you know who im on about mr fred j bonney,bs,aca,dh,m,fc,tt,tp,uha............
you have had something to say about other threads that i have posted so your thoughts are welcome hear!
 
P

pons

Guest
Are you talking about the Thames "record" fish claimed at 18-7 Danny Boy?

What's so shocking about the article ?

I think you will find plenty of discussion on specific Barbel sites about this fish.

Why do you think discussion should be restricted to just BS members ?

The BS have accepted this fish as a river record,on very flimsy evidence,now proved wrong.
Maybe they will retract that now .

Pons.
 
F

Fred Bonney

Guest
I have nothing to say to you danny boy,you have enough to say for yourself, without the need for others to comment!
 
P

Pete Shears

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 5, 2004
Messages
871
Reaction score
2,455
From the comments in this weeks Anglers Mail,the fish in question was weighed on Fox digital scales - I have these scales and the first time I used them I forgot to let scales 'zero' themselves - if you don't do this,any subsequent reading is massively wrong,remember to do it and they are extremely accurate,perhaps this is where an error could have occurred ??
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA-Life Member)

Guest
Really Danny Boy I couldn't give a damn.

There are far more important and interesting things to discuss than issues like this.
 
A

Andy "the Dog" Nellist (SAA) (ACA)

Guest
When claiming a weight in specimen angling you rightly don't get second chances with your reputation....
 
D

DANNY BOY SMITH

Guest
guess you dont want to comment cos you dont like how i type about such people as you then! bonney.
thats one down...
as for the other comments fare enough keep them comming lads
 
Murray Rogers

Murray Rogers

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
1,274
Reaction score
6
Location
herts/bucks border
Ah but Andy some of these guys it seems don't give a fig for reputations cos thev'e been doing it for years and will probably carry on doing it.

How many Pike and Chubb pics have you seen in the rags with inflated weights put to them? Lots and Lots. Now It's happening more and more with Tench and Barbel as well.

But to be 6lb out looks to me more like a simple mistake than cheating, it's 30% over the top, even an idiot wouldn't try that on!!Would they?
 
D

Dave Johnson 1

Guest
I thought it was quite amusing to be fair....with Murray on this
 
N

NottmDon

Guest
Mistakes can easily be made by anyone, I suppose if the other captors(the 12lb version barbel) scales proved to be faulty then a retraction will be printed in the same magazine? Havent had much joy with digital scales so I have gone back to Reubon Heaton dial scales myself. I think the reason I went to digital was they weighed my kit down a little less (no pun intended) so my speci kit is now weighing a bit more again lol. Not down to a wheel barrow yet thank gawd! Photography as a lot to answer for in my opinion, when anglers hold these fish out at arms length some of them look huge! My own self taken pics are not up to much but they provide me with a memory of a good fish,usually held close to my chest so as not to drop it during the picture taking.This holding out at arms length doesnt happen with big carp so the captors pics are a closer representation of what the fish actually looks like I guess.
 
P

pons

Guest
I have Fox Digitals,but have had trouble with them,the batteries dont seem to last five minutes,and I ended up going back to my Avons,and leaving the Foxes at home.

Like you Don,I prefer to hold all fish close to my body,which as you say gives a proper rendition of size,and also using flash gives a far better picture,more so when a reflective background or trees and bushes,or reeds and grass is used.

Pons.
 
M

Matt Brown

Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
I love my Fox digitals. I've had no problems at all with batteries. I use Duracell ones.

Although NiMH rechargeables are better than the old NiCADs they're still cack.
 
M

Mark Hodson

Guest
People who "lie" (and I think this is the correct and most suitable term)about the weight of fish are only cheating themselves.
Some scales weigh a few ounces light or heavy, even the cheapest and worst quality are never more than a pound out, so equipment can't be blamed. Its just sheer ego inflating disohnesty that has no place in angling and should be condemed at every opportunity.

Rant over, thank you.
 
C

Chub King

Guest
We try our hardest to publish accurate weights. We see p-lenty of trophy shots and, as a general rule, you can see a wrong 'un a mile off. 'Claimed' is used whenever the weight of a fish in a photograph is doubted. The odd ones get through though...
 
P

paul williams 2

Guest
chub king......i presume by "WE" you mean that you are part of the weeklies.....can you tell me why "doubted" barbel make big pics but something definate like say a Zander of 16lb+ make a teeny weeny itsibitzy picture....unless held by a "known"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top