Match fishermen have gone up the pole

The weekly magazine Angling Times is trying to win a place in the Guinness Book of Records this week. Not for any sparkling feat of journalism, but through one of its reporters catching a fish on the world's longest rod, an achievement that in record terms ranks right up there with the most barbed hooks you can stick in one nostril.

In fact, Ben Fisk is not using a rod at all, but a pole. It is basically 30 sections of interlocking hollow carbon-fibre with a line attached to the end. And he is not really fishing with it either, but laying it on the water (imagine trying to hold a 41-metre tree) and waiting for a fish to hook itself. Well, each to his own.

Walk along any canal bank or commercial fishery these days, and all you will see is a Chernobyl forest. Nobody uses a rod for competition angling any more. But back in the 1950s, poles were a very rare sight. They were mostly made of glass fibre, though one London maker, Sowerbutts, offered cane roach poles, which required weight-lifting sessions to handle. A friend put 3lb of lead in the butt of his Sowerbutts pole to "balance" it.

Poles then were only used by Continentals to catch fish, and Brits scoffed at the tiddlers that the Frenchies seemed happy with. For years, we missed the point: that poles enabled a bait to be placed with pinpoint accuracy without being dragged off course by wind or current.

The lesson was there: years after year, the French, Belgians or Italians won the world championships. The England team squawked about how unfair the rules were, instead of seeing the pole's benefits.

But slowly the English fishers started to try them out. I recall fishing on the River Trent in Nottingham and seeing Frank Barlow, one of the river's finest anglers, using a pole. "What's this, Frank?" I asked him. "I'm catching fish on it, me ducks," he said. "Call me Fran?ois Barlow."

Two things made the difference. The first was the realisation that tying line on the end was inefficient. Anything bigger than a couple of ounces could break that line. But then some bright spark came up with the idea of attaching the line to elastic that ran through the pole's hollow core. These days, anglers can land fish of 20lb or more with a pole faster than any rod, thanks to that elastic buffer.

Carbon fibre was the other key factor. Poles used to weigh more than your catch after a good day's fishing, and be as floppy as a hosepipe. Now a 16-metre model can weigh little more than 2lb, with the rigidity of a television aerial and the strength to lift a 3lb dead weight.

The bad news: they can cost ?4,000 or more, and every serious competition angler needs two, plus a bunch of spares. Spend ?100 and you've got a decent rod and reel. Match fishing these days is an expensive business.

Interestingly, pole dominance has coincided with competition attendances plunging. A big match was once 1,000 anglers; now it's 100. Angling Times now reports contests with 20 taking part. I blame the pole. I couldn't even see my float at 41 metres.

I wouldn't even call the contraption a pole, I think the word "pier" sounds more accurate.

I organise a competition for club match anglers in the Sheffield area each season that is a VERY rich match (two actually). I paid out just shy of ?3,000 in the semi final and will pay ?5,000 in the 20-peg final.

It's for club match anglers only (though one or two are a bit better than your average clubby) and I would never allow the Tom Pickerings and Alan Scotthornes to fish it.

However, I insist on limiting poles used in the semi and final to 16 metres aiming to be fair to all. I have considered a 14.5 metre limit but you have to strike a balance somewhere.

Long 'floating' poles need not necessarily be expensive. In fact the sheapest 20 metre pole I've seen consisted of a 14 metre pole with two three metre plastic sink waste pipes taped to the end.

There seems to be little point in a length of floating pole record when someone could simple spend a couple of hundred notes on a lorry load of plastic drain pipes and insulating tape, then call it a pole.

You only need the top four sections of elasticated carbon to land a fish.

Pointless.

But, hey, we're in the closed season and you have to fill those pages somehow.

From a technical point of view I can see merit in the longest suspended pole, with no part touching the water during shipping out, feeding, waiting, striking and landing a fish. That would mean the manufacturers having to look long and hard at materials and design.

But floating on the water? Nah. You could create a hundred metre pole if you wanted - but who in their right mind would?

A stunt to catch a fish with a 40 metre pole is exactly that, a stunt its not the norm and never will be. Most serious match anglers these days aim for a 16 metre pole but as with all poles they are rarely fished at their full length and as for cost, you buy what you can afford as with all fishing tackle so no surprise there then is there?

So the demise of match fishing is all because of the pole eh! I suppose that most anglers who regularly fished 100 peggers on rivers no longer bother to fish rivers has nothing to do with it then? Or that where a few pounds that once regularly won river matches and was considered the norm is no longer acceptable because of the enormous weights that can win matches on carp venues, result, fewer river matches where these 100 peggers took place.

That a lot of pools where matches are fished only have a limited amount of pegs, as low as 30 to 40 in a lot of cases, may be the reason for the lack of 100 peggers?. Maybe even the fact that the vast majority of matches fished are club matches and never even reported in the angling press is of no consequence then?

The pole is the cause of lack of attendance in matches you state, sorry Ian I think you are way off track mate, the pole is a very efficient way of catching fish that is why they are used but if there is a drop in attendances then it has nothing whatsoever to do with poles. Don't you think cost and the fact that anglers have finally woken up to the fact that in these regular open matches most of them are pools fodder and nothing else, is more likely to be the reason? They still join pub and club teams though and thats where most of the match scene takes place and always has done but very few are reported in the angling press.