dezza
Well-known member
After a little searching, I was able to find the copy of an article written about 1960 that probably influenced my angling career more than any other that has ever been written.
I reproduce parts of it as follows:
"Last autumn I saw a man catch a beautiful roach. It really was a magnificent fish, a perfect example of what a roach should be - and it put up as good a fight as any roach I have ever seen. It weighed 1lb 14oz.
Its captor's face fell when he realised that it wasn't quite 2 lbs. He had read that I'd had quite a few 2 pounders and one roach of 3 1/4 lbs a few weeks before; and he said wistfully to me, 'Fancy catching a 3 pound roach - it'd make this one look silly!'
I tried to tell him that I'd never caught such a fine roach as his in my life; that a roach of 1lb 14oz is a big one in anyone's language, and that none of my two pounders had fought nearly as well. He thought I was just saying this to cheer me up.
Well I wasn't. I never have thought that that the biggest fish is the best fish. In fact it seldom is. Ask any angler who had had plenty of experience of big fish catching how many of his biggest fish were also the best of their species, for appearance, condition, and fighting ability, and you'll find he'll agree that not many were.
All my biggest roach were far from perfect specimens, last summer. they weren't in anything like good condition. The BEST roach I caught in 1960 weighed not much over a pound!
Try for the whoppers by all means - but in the meantime, remember that the very best sport comes from fish that maybe aren't so big, but which are clean, fit and active, in the prime of their lives. Don't be disappointed with them, I'm not."
I don't have to tell most of you who penned these immortal words, suffice to say that he was our greatest angling writer. These words were written at about the time when I was thinking about starting a specimen hunting group. At a later stage after corresponding with this man for a few weeks, he did write and tell me to try and catch real specimens, not raddled old tarts.
But what do you think, what is a true specimen fish?
I reproduce parts of it as follows:
"Last autumn I saw a man catch a beautiful roach. It really was a magnificent fish, a perfect example of what a roach should be - and it put up as good a fight as any roach I have ever seen. It weighed 1lb 14oz.
Its captor's face fell when he realised that it wasn't quite 2 lbs. He had read that I'd had quite a few 2 pounders and one roach of 3 1/4 lbs a few weeks before; and he said wistfully to me, 'Fancy catching a 3 pound roach - it'd make this one look silly!'
I tried to tell him that I'd never caught such a fine roach as his in my life; that a roach of 1lb 14oz is a big one in anyone's language, and that none of my two pounders had fought nearly as well. He thought I was just saying this to cheer me up.
Well I wasn't. I never have thought that that the biggest fish is the best fish. In fact it seldom is. Ask any angler who had had plenty of experience of big fish catching how many of his biggest fish were also the best of their species, for appearance, condition, and fighting ability, and you'll find he'll agree that not many were.
All my biggest roach were far from perfect specimens, last summer. they weren't in anything like good condition. The BEST roach I caught in 1960 weighed not much over a pound!
Try for the whoppers by all means - but in the meantime, remember that the very best sport comes from fish that maybe aren't so big, but which are clean, fit and active, in the prime of their lives. Don't be disappointed with them, I'm not."
I don't have to tell most of you who penned these immortal words, suffice to say that he was our greatest angling writer. These words were written at about the time when I was thinking about starting a specimen hunting group. At a later stage after corresponding with this man for a few weeks, he did write and tell me to try and catch real specimens, not raddled old tarts.
But what do you think, what is a true specimen fish?
Last edited:
:wh
