Does size matter?

[Anderoo]

I have always been a bit puzzled about this obsession with precise weights.

 

Ah, I must confess that I do need to know exactly how much a big fish weighs. And, if I am honest with myself, a 1lb 15oz roach or 2lb 15oz perch is a world apart from a 2lb roach or 3lb perch. Silly, I know, but what a difference an ounce makes!

 

Similarly, if I catch a fish that is an ounce heavier than a previous PB (this has happened twice so far this season, with perch and tench) I am over the moon. The real pleasure comes from the fact that I was trying to catch big perch and tench respectively (and doing my best to avoid everything else), and had succeeded; the marginal new PB is just a nice little extra

 

If I caught a big fish and didn't have any scales with me, it would always annoy me. So, I guess that for me, yes, size does ultimately matter.

 

I don't really set out to catch PBs but if you are doing all you can to catch a high average size of a particular species, then a PB will come along at some point, and probably only a little bit bigger than the last PB. Successfully catching the high (or above average for the water) average size is the real achievement. But I do have to know the weight!

 

(It may have something to do with my very poor ability to guess weights - off the top of my head this season I've had a '2lb+' perch that weighed 1lb 7oz, a '4lb+' chub that weighed 3lb 4oz and a bream that I would have guessed 'about 14lb' at 11lb 1oz - and in the other direction a tench that looked '7lb 8oz' that weighed 9lb 1oz, a 'mid-2lb' perch that crept just over 3lb and a PB perch that looked 'about 3 and a quarter' that actually weighed 3lb 11oz. I don't know why, but for some reason this is important to me at this stage of my angling life.)

 

Oh, and as Goosequill said, seeing a friend catch a big fish (especially a PB) is the best feeling of all.

[Rusty]

For me the venues are the attraction and I sit firmly in the ‘fish for pleasure’ camp. Since moving to Oxfordshire (from Dartford, Kent) three years ago I’ve been amazed at the miles of picturesque river which are accessible just by joining a couple of clubs.

 

I do believe, however, that everybody has a sort of sub conscious threshold below which they consider they haven’t done very well but this varies from person to person depending on experience, perceived ability and previous achievements. Size of fish caught is a factor, anybody who says otherwise I think is mistaken but for some it’s the only factor.

 

It’s perfectly possible to catch relatively small fish in beautiful surroundings and still feel a great sense of achievement…but more importantly pleasure.

 

I don’t think I’ll ever target a specific weight fish (or set any "targets" as such) but if an impressive specimen comes along I’ll take a photo or two and let you know.

[JV44]

Ah, I must confess that I do need to know exactly how much a big fish weighs. And, if I am honest with myself, a 1lb 15oz roach or 2lb 15oz perch is a world apart from a 2lb roach or 3lb perch. Silly, I know, but what a difference an ounce makes!

 

Similarly, if I catch a fish that is an ounce heavier than a previous PB (this has happened twice so far this season, with perch and tench) I am over the moon. The real pleasure comes from the fact that I was trying to catch big perch and tench respectively (and doing my best to avoid everything else), and had succeeded; the marginal new PB is just a nice little extra

 

If I caught a big fish and didn't have any scales with me, it would always annoy me. So, I guess that for me, yes, size does ultimately matter.

 

I don't really set out to catch PBs but if you are doing all you can to catch a high average size of a particular species, then a PB will come along at some point, and probably only a little bit bigger than the last PB. Successfully catching the high (or above average for the water) average size is the real achievement. But I do have to know the weight!

 

(It may have something to do with my very poor ability to guess weights - off the top of my head this season I've had a '2lb+' perch that weighed 1lb 7oz, a '4lb+' chub that weighed 3lb 4oz and a bream that I would have guessed 'about 14lb' at 11lb 1oz - and in the other direction a tench that looked '7lb 8oz' that weighed 9lb 1oz, a 'mid-2lb' perch that crept just over 3lb and a PB perch that looked 'about 3 and a quarter' that actually weighed 3lb 11oz. I don't know why, but for some reason this is important to me at this stage of my angling life.)

 

Oh, and as Goosequill said, seeing a friend catch a big fish (especially a PB) is the best feeling of all.

 

I weigh fish when i have remembered to take my scales as much to see how close my in the net guess was Normally out by a fair margin both above and below the shown weight] and if it becomes a Pb or close to then that warm glowy feeling makes remembering to take the scales worthwhile ,My old Avon's are donkeys years old and i have never had them checked or tried myself to see how accurate they are so maybe all those 2lb 15oz perch went over the magical mark or maybe those 3lbers were only 2lb 14 .

The boat landing net is a Mcleans one with the scales incorporated into the handle and even though it only weighs in 1/4 lb increments it is accurate as tested by bags of Sugar

[Rich_]

If you don't enjoy the average sized fish, I think you will spend much of your fishing time being disappointed. I also think the amount of big fish in the angling press each week in the media can give a false impression of the average size of species too.

 

I think many of us, at some point, must have traveled some distance to a place where you expected to catch big fish? You may have been lucky , but often you'll have blanked or worse, because of your high expectations, been disappointed to catch fish that were run of the mill.

 

These days I'm happy to fish for whatever species I have chosen and judge it's size relative to the venue, if i have fished it before.My biggest chub, roach and the only pike over 20lb I have ever had, came from likely looking swims on places I had never or hardly fished before, and on days when I'd have been happy to catch anything.

[Steve Walker]

If I caught a big fish and didn't have any scales with me, it would always annoy me. So, I guess that for me, yes, size does ultimately matter.

 

I got to the river today to find that I was missing not only my camera, but also my landing net head. This had two consequences - firstly, I could only fish swims where fish could be safely beached, and secondly, if I did catch a big 'un, I would have nothing to weigh it in. Clearly, today was going to be the day to put a three pounder on the bank.

 

Alas, I did not need my scales to know that the larger of the two perch I caught today was about a pound, and the smaller about 12oz

 

I am hopeful, though - the river was in better condition, and fish in my swim were being attacked by predators, and I believe not pike. I have the rest of the week off, and shall see if I can get another trip or two in.

[Anderoo]

It’s perfectly possible to catch relatively small fish in beautiful surroundings and still feel a great sense of achievement…but more importantly pleasure.

 

Very well put Rusty - on re-reading my other posts it does sound like I am more weight-orientated than I actually am. I spent a few wonderful hours last weekend trotting for whatever at a beautiful (if low!) Thames tributary and caught trout, chub, dace and minnows, none of them even approaching specimen size, and enjoyed every second. Even better, I had good company.

 

If you don't enjoy the average sized fish, I think you will spend much of your fishing time being disappointed. I also think the amount of big fish in the angling press each week in the media can give a false impression of the average size of species too.

 

Another good point, and I agree completely. If the number is everything, not only are you missing out on the whole point of fishing, but you will almost always go home disappointed.

Edited November 9, 2009 by Anderoo

[Dick Dastardly]

A good topic but with some absolutely brilliant replies!I just don't really know where to start so please excuse my lazy reply in statement form.

 

If I weigh a fish then it has to be done as accurately as possible otherwise whats the point of weighing it!

 

PB breaking is a good way of "progressing" in the sport.

 

Its a great shame when someone/yourself catches a PB that is massively bigger than the previous as it then "detracts" from the fun of subsequent captures.ie if your first carp is a twenty it takes a bit away from your first double 15 etc.

 

I still enjoy catching fish of all sizes.Only way catching big fish has affected me is that I no longer weigh or take photos (unless unusual looking,special reason etc) of fish unless I think they will be either a new PB or of a size that is "special" to me.I see this as a good thing as I still get all the fun but dont have to mess the fish about!

 

I know (or should say have recorded) all the exact weights of PB's.

 

I tend to agree with Richard that chasing PB's is actually more fun than breaking them!

 

No matter how big and therefore realistically unbreakable some of my PB's are I fish for all fish so always have "obtainable" ones that I can target .

 

I tend to target specific PB's as and when the occasion arises rather than "chase" them across the country.

 

Biggest failing with modern anglers PB's are that they fail to realise that they are indeed what they say ie "personal" bests.Although comparable to others results these are really personal.For example Ive never caught a 2lb roach or maybe a better examples an 8 ozs Dace or Chub bigger than 4lb simply because Ive never really fished waters regularly that hold then.However having lived on the banks of a world record carp venue its not surprising that Ive caught 70lb plus carp.See what I mean?

 

Anglers (Ive seen it with my friends kids) who catch massive fish "too soon" soon loose interest in the game,the compulsion with numbers then does eat them up.After all no fun trying to break a PB that you realistically wont.

 

Worms "dreaming" is very true.Whilst I don't mind not catching a monster fish I much prefer the water I'm fishing to maybe have one as its the expectation and element of the unknown that turns me on.

 

Dales Ive seen/met many who turn their noses up and dismiss fish that Ive caught due to size even which particular fish it is if known! Inevitably they do this to look superior as often they've caught nowt them selves either that day or before!

 

Oh just to say this topic shows why I like AN and its members so much comparted with other sites.All posts here have been of a nice rounded nature.

Edited November 9, 2009 by BUDGIE

[Rusty]

Very well put Rusty - on re-reading my other posts it does sound like I am more weight-orientated than I actually am.

 

Nope sorry didn't mean it to specifically address your post. I think you've got the balance about right, very capable of putting your mind to catching specimen fish [and succeeding] without losing sight of why you fish.

[Anderoo]

Nope sorry didn't mean it to specifically address your post. I think you've got the balance about right, very capable of putting your mind to catching specimen fish [and succeeding] without losing sight of why you fish.

 

No, that's OK, I wasn't really replying to you specifically I just re-read my other posts!

 

Budgie, a very nice reply. Although I think we all know all you're interested in is eels. 70lb carp? Come on, we all know what you're really after. One day, that 3lb+ eel will become a reality, and all those dismal nights chucking 8lb tench in the bushes can finally be forgotten

[Kappa]

Budgie, a very nice reply. Although I think we all know all you're interested in is eels. 70lb carp? Come on, we all know what you're really after. One day, that 3lb+ eel will become a reality, and all those dismal nights chucking 8lb tench in the bushes can finally be forgotten

 

3lb eel? PAH! Eels below 4lb don't count!

 

Rich