Record Rudd

[Kappa]

But never mind, he is a carper, so must be either mistaken, has dodgy scales, or is simply telling lies????????????

Weighing the smaller species is a lot harder than the bigger ones eg the weight of a wet carp sling (not subtracted or allowed for) makes no great odds for most when weighing 20lb + fish but that weight can nigh on double the true weight of a perch,roach or Rudd etc.

most carpers would be very careful how they weigh a fish.

 

Really?!? I know a carp angler that first retrospectively added 11oz to the weight of several tench he caught before wanting to add over 2lbs to each fish (again retrospectively). Clearly his equipment wasn't up to the job but given more than 50 years fishing experience he still mis-weighed every fish he caught that day and then added to the weight of each one once he got home.

 

So either even experienced carp anglers can't accurately weigh small fish. Or even experienced carpers will lie to get bigger weights. I'd argue plus or minus 2lbs (or even 11oz) is alot even for a large carp especially if you are claiming a fish of 40lb 4oz, more likely a 38!

 

Rich

[Rusty]

I'm not sure why anybody is doubting this guy's claim. It's said many times on this site how difficult it is to judge a weight from a picture and yet opinions are being formed on that basis. Is it easier to judge because it's being claimed as a record?

 

It's been weighed and witnessed, nobody else was there and we know that pictures are unreliable, what is there to doubt?

[poledark]

If you are having a dig at me Richardn then you are wasting your time. I also had 2 excellent (one very highly respected anglers) weigh my 40+. I never touched the scales or sling...I was a bit shocked at the time

 

Re the tench at wingham, the sling weighs 2lb 4oz dry, "over 3lb" when wet, so things did get a bit confused. First fish went 12lb 1oz on the dry sling, but after sliding the fish back and immersing the sling the sling weighed 3lb 4oz, so this was deducted, and we continued to take 3lb 4oz off of each fish weighed that day. As there was a gap of some hours between each capture, then the sling "probably" dryed out a bit each time, but by how much I will never know. Either way I did not get a double that day, nor any potential record, but did my best to give Steve an accurate list of the weights.

 

I think the bloke in the next swim will confirm all this.

 

 

The 19 "from a southern water" is on my list.............

 

Den

[kas]

Im no expert on fish weights but having had a good look at the photo I would estimate the fish to be around 14 or 15 inches in length. Does that help out estimating the actual weight?

[Dales]

This thread has got me wondering, how many records have been caught unintentionaly by anglers targeting other species?

 

Not that it makes much difference, but it would be nice to hear of claims being made by some one actualy fishing for the big one they caught? Even at a PB level it does feel extra special when you catch one by design.

 

I do wonder is it inevitable that one day all records well for the species that grow over a few pounds will be held by "Carpers" using some form of bolt rig or another?

[Anderoo]

Firstly, a point on weighing fish. It's so easy to do I really can't understand anyone not being able to get a precise weight. Wet the sling, hang it on the scales, zero the scales, put the fish in the sling, weigh the fish. Do that for every fish, as the sling dries out and the scales need to be re-zeroed. Really couldn't be easier. The fish can be in the net in the water while you get the zeroing done, it doesn't even have to be done in a rush.

 

Alternatively (and this is what I tend to do with chub), zero the scales, hang the net (head only, not pole) containing the fish on the scales, return the fish, weigh the net and deduct the weight of the net. Again, you have to do it every time as the net will never weigh exactly the same.

 

Taking off the same amount of weight for a sling/net over a period of a whole session will not provide accurate weights. Even my 24" pan net head can weigh between 8-12oz depending on how wet it is. That's the difference between a 5.12 chub and a 6.

 

Secondly, on Dales' point, it's probably not as many as you'd think. Tench, bream, eel...any more? And I'm sure only then because on the waters in question that's by far the most popular style of fishing. I am convinced that fishing for carp just isn't a very effective way to catch other species, it's just the massive number of combined rod hours that eventually produce them.

 

The silliest record now must be the zander, caught on a pellet by a barbel angler It proves a point though, how many combined rod hours are spent fishing for barbel on the Severn, and how many zander does it produce?

 

Even on carp-water big bream, the number of rod hours to bream caught is off the scale. You've probably seen Duncan Charman in the mags recently, fishing the Cemex pits for their big bream, and he's had loads of them by fishing for them specifically, way more than the carp anglers.

 

Fishing for carp will turn up lots of different species, but that doesn't make it very effective. But if that's all everyone does then yes, eventually that's how most records will be caught.

[Dick Dastardly]

Den your taking my comments as aimed at proper carp anglers,they are aimed at all the thousands of instant carp anglers we now have. An in experienced angler is an inexperienced angler no matter what species he fish's for.

 

My comments about poor weighing are entirely based on what I have seen first hand over the years Im sure you dont want me to bore you all with anecdotal evidence?

 

Richard to me and a lot of other carp anglers (in fact any angler) the exact weight is important (other wise why bother weighing fish in the first place?) Its just that an inexperienced angler is less likely to realise there is a mistake with the weight/not care to much with bigger fish than small fish.Also sadly (but true) for many a 19lb 15 ozs carp or pike is a "20".

 

Which all brings it back round to Tiggers comment,NO it doesn't matter if they aren't that fussed about an accurate weight,No it doesnt matter if they want to kid them selves that the 19.15 was a 20,No it doesn't really matter if they want to lie to their mates about it BUT it does matter when they are claiming records.

 

However please note that all of my comments (other than the fact the guy is holding the fish at arms length) are not directed towards this capture as such as I dont know the guy the situation or anything I wouldnt even like to have to say 100% whether the Rudd is that size or not.They are on the subject of **** poor weighing/recording in general.

 

One last comment though is Im fed up of hearing about how I should be using boilies bolt rigs and buzzers for every thing as carpers have "proved" these tactics are the best..................Don't have to be flaming Einstein to realise if everyone's a carp angler and fish's this way most of the fish caught will be by them on these methods!

[Alan Stubbs]

FWIW, I weigh my sling 'wetted' each time, and zero it immediately afterwards. I then transfer the fish to be weighed into the sling to weigh it. That said, only if a fish visibly suggests it has beaten my previous PB by a margin will I even consider weighing it.

 

At least it's consistent. As for 'shrinking ounces', I weighed a common at 19lbs 14ozs and delayed my first 20 by almost 3 years.

 

I don't care. I fish for relaxation, pleasure and education. I don't fish for avoirdupoids.

[Sportsman]

As I believe I may have mentioned in the past, I really don't understand why angler generally place such importance on the weight of the fish they catch.

I have no idea what my PBs might be for anything but Pike, and that was weighed by someone else.

I bought a set of scales once but have never used them.

[jason.p]

Llike Anderoo, if I ever feel the need to weigh a fish I weigh it in the landing net, then deduct the net weight, that way you don't need to handle the fish any more than necessary. It can be landed unhooked weighed and returned with the minimum of stress. A new local fishery wants a record card filled out for all catches with weights and I'm sure this method is accurate enough for this.