BIG roach.

[Cliff Hatton]

What weight do you reckon? It's 16-17" long.

 

[Molehill]

I wouldn't hazard a guess from the photo, but it does have that "big" look about it.
Was it caught or found dead, lake or river? I'm not expecting you to divulge the swim it came from but as a long time inhabitant of mid Wales, did it come from that part of the country?

 

[no-one in particular]

Found dead I reckon, the eye looks a bit decomposed, looks fat enough to be 3lb+ though.

 

[Cliff Hatton]

No decomposition at all, Mark, it was either on its very last legs or actually dead. No secrets either, but I'd like a few more comments before giving the details. Thanks

 

[S-Kippy]

I reckon that's nearer 4lb than 3. Look at the depth of it.

 

[mikench]

Vastly bigger than any I've caught! Must keep trying

 

[Cliff Hatton]

There's a curious lack of interest in this giant roach... I wonder why that should be. Come on....how about a few more estimates?

 

[S-Kippy]

That is a huge fish so Im revising my estimate upwards. I reckon thats over 4lb so im guessing 4-2.

 

[thecrow]

I have never seen a Roach with that sort of depth compared to its body length and would say it died or was dying from some sort of disease, as for weight difficult to say as the breadth of the fish is not visible and that is where lots of fish carry their weight.

 

[Graham Elliott 1]

2lb 11oz. I would guess

 

[barbelboi]

Very difficult from a pic - the largest pic I have of a roach on the ground is 2.14 and this one is significantly deeper - hard to judge the length in relation to mine but will throw in a 3.8 guesstimate................

 

[flightliner]

I,m sort of with Barbelboy on this one but it's the length that confusing me somewhat, SO, I'll up it a bit and say 3-12?.

 

[no-one in particular]

Looking at my ruler and imagining 17ins' its colossal for a roach so I am going for 4lb 5oz. Must have been found just noticed the rod is just an unmade un-joined bit like someone came along after packing up fishing and came across it.

 

[peter crabtree]

Is it a true roach? The mouth looks wrong to me? The shape is more like a Rudd but the colouration looks ok?
Might it be a continental roach, possibly 5lb+?

 

[binka]

I can't help thinking there's a twist to this somewhere along the line.

The fish doesn't look right at all to me, a bit flakey around the scales like some of those frozen coarse deadbaits occasionally go.

 

[mikench]

Is it a roach ? It could be a hybrid of some sort.

 

[Philip]

Leaving aside the question of Hybrids, Ray Clarkes record I belive was 17.5 inches to tail fork...perhaps Ray is about to confirm that...

Assuming it was measured correctly, a Roach of 16-17 inches to tail fork -not to tail tip- should be a 3 pound fish. As this fish is very fat it should easily be a 3lb fish.

However !

I know you said no decomposition but my initial reacation on seeing the photo was that this was a fish that was already dead and had started to take on water so bloating it.

I have a feeling it may weigh less than it looks.

 

[S-Kippy]

I have a feeling it may weigh less than it looks.

Like me !

Ive seen the cast of Clarkey's fish (his one not the fakes) and it is mind blowingly huge. It does however have the same sort of depth of body and is of a similar length which is what makes me think ithis is a very big roach indeed.

 

[Philip]

I have to say as well that for some reason the photo looks vagely familier.

I am probably wrong but I am sure I saw a very similar photo somewhere in the past.

Is this a recent photo Cliff ?

 

[flightliner]

I thought it was a dead one when I first saw it.
It,s been knocked about a bit and its eyes are looking dead centre.
A live one on a photo is usually looking downwards unless it's on its last legs and about to croak.