Hmmmmmm, Sometimes I wonder about my friends fish size

Well its spring and it has sprung with the excitement of weights. I’ve got a friend, Tim, and he and I have been dreaming about those spring catches for atleast 3 months now. Well he called me the other day and said he went fishing in one of our favorite spots and I asked if he caught anything. I always knew he occasionally mentally overweighed his fish when describing the size and he said I limited out on smallies fishing on the bottom with night crawlers and I asked the size of them. He said they were all over 2 pounds and up to four pounds. Well knowing he over weighs his fish I didn’t say anything to him to curb his excitement, and took it at as what was in the moment. After adding up his approximate weight I took a few pounds off and figured that was a more accurate total weight. You guys have any friends like that, like all fishermen are liars except me and you, and sometimes I wonder about you.

My wife always tells me size doesn’t matter.

I certainly know a few people like that. I never question them but anytime I’m with them, I try and get a true measurement on each fish so the can’t stretch the truth.

Still, over time, those same fish seem to grow. It doesn’t bother me. I just find it hilarious.

You can usually tell when people you meet are doing the same. These are usually people that can’t wait to tell everyone of a hot bite where others would keep their mouth shut.

I still remember that 5# bass I caught out of Calhoun. That 6# is going to be hard to beat. I mean a 7# is pretty rare, so to catch one over 8# to beat my new pb is going to be tough.

I am horrible at eyeballing any unit of measure, so I got Rapala scale. Its a good thing, because the bass I have been catching look 4.5#+ to me, but none have breached 4#. I like having more accurate weights. I am not in any competition with anyone, but I am with myself and I am not interested in false weights and measures.

The tell: “and a half”
Yeah we got a limit of walleyes; all about 2 to 3 and a half pounds.

LIE! BS!!

Inches is way better.

Not sure why but Ive always been the one to hate exaggeration. In fact the typical fish estimates over the years ive given I think are actually smaller than what they were bc of it. I will be getting a digital scale and a tourney grade bump board to get real results.

Will be quite fun seeing how they measure this year. Who knows, probably will all come in smaller and lighter and ill regain my spot in the crowds!

mplspug wrote:

so I got Rapala scale.

I just bought one as well. I’ve always just gone by length but I look forward to accurate weights.
The formulas, length X girth divided by number of beers you’ve consumed are only ballpark numbers.
I also tend to estimate on the low side just to avoid the reputation being discussed.

What ever a Fisherman tells you divide it by .5!

5 lbs walleye divided by .5 is a 10 lbs…so I’ve caught hundreds of 10 lbers!!! I get your point though epg, just sayin!

I have a friend who fishes a lot of the same water at the same time I do, and everytime I tell him how we did he somehow catches a few more and bigger. It’s amazing lol. I try and keep it as accurate as possible, but I never worry about the truth getting in the way of a good story!

I really was never good at math.

I just measure’m and let it go at that. Waaay too tough on fish to measure and weigh if you are turning it back jerr

Have a big headed family member like that. Have been making fun of him for years but some how he always gets people to believe him. I always tell people to not believe everything they hear

I try to talk in inches no matter what the species I catch. Way more accurate.

If it needs embellishing, it isn’t worth bragging about in the first place.

Big fish are rare enough that I hate to diminish their significance by stretching other fish to match them…..,

A few days ago we were checking out a Creek at night where the walleyes were coming through to spawn. One of the guys kept saying, “there’s a 6 pounder”. In reality the biggest fish we saw was only 18 to 19 inches with most being 14 to 16 inch males.
DT

deertracker wrote:

A few days ago we were checking out a Creek at night where the walleyes were coming through to spawn. One of the guys kept saying, “there’s a 6 pounder”. In reality the biggest fish we saw was only 18 to 19 inches with most being 14 to 16 inch males.
DT

This reminded me of a time back in the day while pre-fishing a PWT event on the upper lakes of the Lake Winnebago system. The event minimum size limit in the original rules was 16″. ( that changed to 14″ the night before the event started though–as no one could catch keepers!)

I was staying at a resort with multiple cabins–filled with fishermen/tourists. Each of the first three evenings, after a 12 hr. day hunting 16″ plus fish, I would go check on the catches of the “neighbors”. And every report from them, just out fishin’ for fun, was “limits of 18 inchers”. My tally for 3 days? ZERO over 16″ among many dozens of 13″-15″ ‘ers. Drove me nuts! HOW could THEY have figured it out and not me? Couldn’t sleep! Nerves were now frazzled! So–the 4th day I came in early with my tail tucked tight. But the “neighbors” were still out. So–as they eventually came to the dock, I met them with my Judge in hand. Asking if I could measure their fish–as they proclaimed there was another limit of 18″ ‘ers in the live-well, I stepped into their boat. ALL of the those 18″ ‘ers. ended up being the SAME dog-gone size I had been catching all week! Needless to say the ruler didn’t lie and the egg dripped heavily off the neighbors faces…admitting they had no ruler in the boat after all.

And it ain’t just fish! I hear every year from the same high speed beef hunters that they shoot 150-200 lb. does and 220-250lb. bucks. I bring the scale into the picture and the “hard drag” gets lighter after the fact.

Anyone recall the “De-Liar” scale? lol Before the days of size limits, no one ever measured fish but only used the “De-Liar”–weighing the fish only.

Fisherman-if their lips are moving they’re lying.:

These are the same guys that lose ten balls during a round of golf and still shoot a 85.

This is one of the reasons over the years growing up I started to bring a camera and get photo evidence to back up my case lol I never shoot any funny angles and what not those guys drive me nuts and it gives good people a bad name I had to fight tooth and nail with my family growing up to try to let them in on a good bite or tell them about the monster swimming in the lake but in the end Photos don’t lie when there is a Tape next to the fish

jerry b wrote:

I just measure’m and let it go at that. Waaay too tough on fish to measure and weigh if you are turning it back jerr

You bring up an excellent point. Might lead to another post in the future.

Is he lying to you or himself ?

If you knew my friend Tim like said above you’d chuckle. Its a good way to hear the bites half way decent but you have to subtract a little bit.

Heres another, but halfway accurate story from Tim.

We have a dam here in town and the Cedar river that runs through town here is full of flatheads and every few years the bite below the dam is very good. When conditions are where they should be for the flatheads to move up river from down river a few miles the bite is very good with lots of big ones being caught.

One day Tim called me and said him and Jeremiah went fishing and Tim hooked into a big one. He said he fought it for over and hour and then I asked how big it was and got this what I call a halfway accurate description.

He said it went up under the bridge of the dam and he had to pull as hard as he could to get it to come down where he and Jeremiah could try to net it. They lowered the bridge net after seeing how big it was that had a 26″ bicycle rim for the top hoop to keep it open and this was tied to a rope. Tim said they tried to get this flatheads head into the 26″ rim and it wouldn’t go in. So they managed to get the tail in and enough of the fish into the net where the both of them could lift the fish to the bridges sidewalk.

He said they both groaned pulling up the weight of this fish and everybody on the west side of the river bank could see the size and what struggle had taken place, the whole thing. He said they got it to the top of the handrail and the bottom of the net ripped open, the fish dropped and broke the line. He said everybody yelled with disappointment. So between Tim and Jeremiah struggling to pull this fish up, a 26″ bicycle rim for the net hoop and what was said on the bank, is how big this flathead was.

So what’s the minimum weight of a flathead where the width of it head won’t go into a 26″ bicycle rim. This is the most accurate description I’ve gotten from Tim, plus a hell of a story.

nhamm wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>jerry b wrote:</div>
I just measure’m and let it go at that. Waaay too tough on fish to measure and weigh if you are turning it back jerr

You bring up an excellent point. Might lead to another post in the future.

The Rapala scale comes with this clamp that that clamps down extremely hard attached. It also comes with a big hook. I switched them out thinking that clamp would break a fishes jaw. But I don’t necessarily like a hook either under the gill plate and I’m not about to injure a fish further by jabbing a hook through under the chin.

Then I realized I could use the clamp safely. All I have to do is clamp on to the lure before removing it. It seems like the safest option with a Rapala scale for a fish you are going to weigh and release.

for future reference, all Pugs catches are minus 1 lure

In a friendly yearly walleye tourney, we did not have a Big Fish (28″) option, so they could all be released, one guy ALWAYS caught multiple 28″+ fish and belly ached about it. When the digital camera era started, we added a photo option for the big fish to be registered, a clear photo taken on the judge would suffice…. he NEVER brought a single picture to the weigh in once over 9 years.

I like to be honest with myself on weights and measurements, but hearing and telling fish tales is part of the sport!

I just hook my net hoop with the scale to get a quick weight. Then subtract the weight of an empty net. Actually quicker and easier than getting a length.

big_g wrote:

for future reference, all Pugs catches are minus 1 lure

….and snap on sinkers and tail pull.

raynestorm wrote:

I just hook my net hoop with the scale to get a quick weight. Then subtract the weight of an empty net. Actually quicker and easier than getting a length.

That’s the method I prefer if it is practical. Practical meaning I have one handy. The best part about that method is you can keep the fish in the water or dunk it when trying to get a picture/weight. The only down side to that that other people might say is it could remove slime, especially if the fish is a flopper. My armchair logic tells me that fish slime is not as big of a deal as people make it out to be. Slime is like sweat. I’ve never had an issue replacing sweat after toweling off.

Also having a partner is nice. It gets pretty hectic when you are alone and trying to get a good picture and weight without stressing the fish out.

I never guess a big girls wieght,and if I new I would not tell anyways.

I don’t think people necessairly exaggerate. I suspect many don’t have a clue about how to estimate weight because most guys seldom if EVER actually weigh a fish to begin with.

It’s just a twist on never attribute to malice what can just as easily be explained by cluelessness. I totally admit I never weigh a fish so when it comes to estimating weight, I’d be lucky if I could get it to the nearest pound. I don’t even have a scale. My fly rods are marked in inches and I have had rulers in every boat, but as far as an accurate weighing, I just never do it.

Grouse

Most 9 lb+ walleye are 6-7 lbs

Aren’t there nets with scales built in on the market?
If not, hmmmm

belletaine wrote:

Aren’t there nets with scales built in on the market?
If not, hmmmm

Or bumper boards with a scale.

Generally I have found over the years if you use the formula” divide by two and subtract one” you are pretty close to the real weight.