. If you figure that there are approximately 10,000 people fishing each year, what are the odds?
Please don’t send me to the electric chair based on “odds”!
The odds of Heavenly intervention are minimal to none.
so in 2016 and 2017 they cheated with “no fish”… that’s some solid evidence of a 8 year run at cheating…. meh.
Seems there are two things here. No one seems to be averse to doing an investigation. I’m all for keeping it honest and sending a message to potential cheaters out there.
Second, why publish it? Seems that should have been avoided or at least not mention exact names. Did an enterprising reporter get wind of what was happening and push them into a statement? Did they reach out to the press? Other?
Saw one other thing in the article. Twice before the winners were investigated. One took the polygraph, passed, and got the prize. The other decided against it, hmmm now that one doesn’t seem on the up and up.
Saw one other thing in the article. Twice before the winners were investigated. One took the polygraph, passed, and got the prize. The other decided against it, hmmm now that one doesn’t seem on the up and up.
It didn’t say these specific guys had been investigated in the past, just that twice in the tournament’s history there had been investigations:
In the contest’s 28 years, two other anglers were investigated for possible cheating, Meyer said. “In those two cases, one person took a required lie detector test and passed it, and the other person declined, which was his right. When he did, he forfeited his prize.
Second, why publish it? Seems that should have been avoided or at least not mention exact names. Did an enterprising reporter get wind of what was happening and push them into a statement? Did they reach out to the press? Other?
In my opinion a guy like Dennis Anderson should have more journalistic integrity than to print names attached to accusations like this. He’s been at the Strib for what, 25 years? That said, Brainerd Jaycees are the ones who released the name and they’ll be the ones to get sued if it comes to that. (In fact it sounds like it may come to that. . .) And that would be a shame because human error could cause harm to a good charitable organization.
Besides all the other coincidences, this seems most damning imo, “By standard measures, a 1.07-pound perch should be between 12 and 13 inches long. According to lake surveys dating to 1986, the Department of Natural Resources has never netted a perch that big in Gull Lake”
This tournament already has absolutely NO appeal to me. I’d much rather make a tax-deductible donation to a good cause and go about fishing elsewhere. Sitting around holes with 10k+ people offers no enjoyment to me as an outdoorsman (but to each their own). Then when you add the fact that the organizing group is most likely going to release your name along with mention of “cheating allegations” each and every year if you somehow win a big prize???
Go ahead and investigate whatever is deemed necessary each year. However, by going public and slandering peoples’ names before an investigation is completed, you lose just as much credibility as anyone who has or would ever cheat.
It takes scum to cheat…the same scum that ruins people’s reputation without warrant. Brainerd Jaycees should be ashamed.
I really can’t make a comment because the Star requires you to subscribe a min of .99 to read even 1 article 
………I’ll just let you guy’s fill me in…..
Besides all the other coincidences, this seems most damning imo, “By standard measures, a 1.07-pound perch should be between 12 and 13 inches long. According to lake surveys dating to 1986, the Department of Natural Resources has never netted a <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>perch that big in Gull Lake”
Not saying these guys did, or did not cheat. But by that thinking state records should be questioned as well since the DNR never netted that size fish in the past either. Do you honestly think all fish in a lake are sampled?
just a thought but could it be that the individuals have been reported many times to be cheating and yet no conclusive evidence has been found yet they keep getting reported? perhaps the event is making a point to the accused that they are not welcome back.
the entire event is still a privet event, as one must buy a ticket to be involved.
just a different side of thinking
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>BigWerm wrote:</div>
Besides all the other coincidences, this seems most damning imo, “By standard measures, a 1.07-pound perch should be between 12 and 13 inches long. According to lake surveys dating to 1986, the Department of Natural Resources has never netted a <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>perch that big in Gull Lake”Not saying these guys did, or did not cheat. But by that thinking state records should be questioned as well since the DNR never netted that size fish in the past either. Do you honestly think all fish in a lake are sampled?
no not all fish are sampled, thats why its only a sample. Now say a sample never finds an asian carp in the st croix does that mean they are not there?
Then when you add the fact that the organizing group is most likely going to release your name along with mention of “cheating allegations” each and every year if you somehow win a big prize???
Go ahead and investigate whatever is deemed necessary each year. However, by going public and slandering peoples’ names before an investigation is completed, you lose just as much credibility as anyone who has or would ever cheat.
It takes scum to cheat…the same scum that ruins people’s reputation without warrant. Brainerd Jaycees should be ashamed.
It doesn’t sound like they do this every year, this is some guy or group of guys that consistently finish near the top of the leaderboard, that’s tough to do with so many people fishing in a small area.
no all fish are sampled, thats why its only a sample. Now saw a sample never finds an asian carp in the st croix does that mean they are not there?
I don’t think that’s what he was saying at all. Gull probably gets sampled every 2 or 3 years. If they haven’t netted a perch that big on Gull in 10 straight samples, then chances are that perch of that size are rare in the lake. Obviously it’s possible, but the chances are much less than if this tournament was on Winnie or something.
Polygraph will be the answer. Looks like they would be innocent if they are so willing to take it.
Polygraph is hardly more accurate than a coin flip. There is a reason they aren’t admissible in court.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>BigWerm wrote:</div>
Besides all the other coincidences, this seems most damning imo, “By standard measures, a 1.07-pound perch should be between 12 and 13 inches long. According to lake surveys dating to 1986, the Department of Natural Resources has never netted a <strong class=”ido-tag-strong”>perch that big in Gull Lake”Not saying these guys did, or did not cheat. But by that thinking state records should be questioned as well since the DNR never netted that size fish in the past either. Do you honestly think all fish in a lake are sampled?
All state record fish are questioned, and a process followed to make it official:
-Weigh the fish on a state-certified scale (found at most bait shops and butcher shops), witnessed by two observers.
-Take the fish to a DNR fisheries office for positive identification and a state record fish application.
-Complete the State Record Fish submission form PDF and send it along with a clear, full-length photo of your fish to the address listed on the form.
Just as any tournament anglers catch should be questioned when they show up in many tournaments with similarly sized pike, or a perch that is a statistical anomaly for the lake. I agree names shouldn’t be released unless they’re found guilty with evidence to support it. But have no problem with questioning it.
I am willing to give the Strib Reporter and the Jaycees the benefit of the double about releasing the names. All the Jaycees had to do was state that there were three prizes being investigated, Prize 1, 3, & x. The names on the Leader Board are posted as the fish are weighed in. I would the hope the reporter is smart enough to put the two together.
Having fished the contest a few times, unless you are really a dedicated individual, setup your house two or three days ahead of time on the west edge of the area, and stake your holes out at 7 a.m. in the morning; you’re probably not even going to see a fish.
It is a charitable event with a fun winter format. Let keep it that way. 
Contest officials confirmed this week that they are investigating whether three men from Ohio, a father, a son and another relative, legitimately caught the fish they say they did, earning first, third and 98th places among the 150 prize winners on Jan. 27.
I’ve read the article in the Strib and Brainerd papers and nowhere did it say the Jaycees released the names.
Second, why publish it? Seems that should have been avoided or at least not mention exact names. Did an enterprising reporter get wind of what was happening and push them into a statement? Did they reach out to the press? Other?
Since there had been rumors going around town that the officials were looking into possible cheating, I’m guessing that the Star Tribune got wind of it and asked the contest officials about it. The original article does state “Contest officials confirmed this week….”. It does not appear that the contest officials reached out to the press or posted their own statement about the investigation. Had they done so, I agree that would be very poor taste.
After reading some of the replies, I can understand some of the feelings that the names should not have been mentioned, but like the last posted said, its not hard for someone to figure out who the officials would be investigating.
Polygraph is hardly more accurate than a coin flip. There is a reason they aren’t admissible in court.
To borrow from Luke Skywalker:
“Impressive. Every word in those sentences was wrong.” 
We use polygraph routinely where I work…up to 50 times every month. They are a very useful tool for validating statements if performed properly by a certified expert, focused on a single issue, and when the consequences for being caught lying are high. In those proper circumstances, accuracy has been scientifically established at 89%. When addressing multiple issues using one exam, it’s reduced to 85%. Those rates are waaaayyyy better than a coin toss.
For a long time they weren’t admissible (per the Frye ruling from the 1920s). But starting in the ’90s it has been up to the individual trial judge to decide whether or not they meet the Daubert standard – requiring that any expert testimony presented in court is based on scientific knowledge. Since it’s arguable whether or not any specific occasion would meet this standard, they typically aren’t even proposed as evidence.
For non-trial situations such as our use in my workplace – or to validate that a prize-winner followed the rules of a fishing contest – accuracy at 89% is more than adequate as a screening tool that tells you if you need to look at something more closely. If the fishing contest winner claims they followed the rules and is found truthful? Everyone can be satisfied that it’s very likely they won it honestly. But if they were found deceptive on the polygraph and got disqualified? They could sue, arguing the polygraph wasn’t accurate. Of course, they’d have to prove it, and essentially that means providing positive proof in court somehow that they did follow the rules. And THAT would be an interesting case…
. It does not appear that the contest officials reached out to the press or posted their own statement about the investigation. Had they done so, I agree that would be very poor taste.
Ultimately, the contest organizers are responsible for the leak of who was being investigated and even the existence of an investigation. In this day and age, you simply have to have better information control when it comes to issues like this. There was no reason for the organizers to comment on ANYTHING. Let the investigation play out and keep your mouth shut until you have results, that’s the best course of action and then anything published in the media is not official and therefore speculation.
Regardless of the outcome, they Jaycees have now probably managed to get themselves sued.
Per the Strib article, I think the key in this is who sent the list of tournaments entered / prizes won and what’s their agenda? Sour grapes or insider baseball from someone who’s had tournament run-ins with this crowd before but couldn’t prove anything? The two rules of news tipsters is 1) they always have an agenda and 2) they’re never telling the whole story.
Grouse
Polygraph is hardly more accurate than a coin flip. There is a reason they aren’t admissible in court.
To borrow from Luke Skywalker:
“Impressive. Every word in those sentences was wrong.”
We use polygraph routinely where I work…up to 50 times every month. They are a very useful tool for validating statements if performed properly by a certified expert, focused on a single issue, and when the consequences for being caught lying are high. In those proper circumstances, accuracy has been scientifically established at 89%. When addressing multiple issues using one exam, it’s reduced to 85%. Those rates are waaaayyyy better than a coin toss.
For a long time they weren’t admissible (per the Frye ruling from the 1920s). But starting in the ’90s it has been up to the individual trial judge to decide whether or not they meet the Daubert standard – requiring that any expert testimony presented in court is based on scientific knowledge. Since it’s arguable whether or not any specific occasion would meet this standard, they typically aren’t even proposed as evidence.
For non-trial situations such as our use in my workplace – or to validate that a prize-winner followed the rules of a fishing contest – accuracy at 89% is more than adequate as a screening tool that tells you if you need to look at something more closely. If the fishing contest winner claims they followed the rules and is found truthful? Everyone can be satisfied that it’s very likely they won it honestly. But if they were found deceptive on the polygraph and got disqualified? They could sue, arguing the polygraph wasn’t accurate. Of course, they’d have to prove it, and essentially that means providing positive proof in court somehow that they did follow the rules. And THAT would be an interesting case…
In my limited reading I’ve come to understand that they’re inadmissible in court in 32 of the 50 states, and also inadmissible in Europe and Canada.
89%, 85%, whatever — when you’re smearing a man’s reputation and trying to prove that he cheated so you can re-claim his property, you better be 100% or go home.
Figure out a way to run your contest that either prevents cheating from happening or catches the guy red-handed. Don’t conduct a witch-hunt after the fact based on “well gee this sure seems fishy.”
If they mention the size, species, and or the finish place of the fish/contestant, i can look at the results online and see the contestants name and where they are from. The jaycees may have never “released” their names.
Also, maybe the big hoopla could deter others from cheating, knowing that all info for a possible cheat will be out there. Right or wrong, might make a guy think twice.
89%, 85%, whatever — when you’re smearing a man’s reputation and trying to prove that he cheated so you can re-claim his property, you better be 100% or go home.
Figure out a way to run your contest that either prevents cheating from happening or catches the guy red-handed. Don’t conduct a witch-hunt after the fact based on “well gee this sure seems fishy.”
And that right there is why the really big-money tournament trails have co-anglers or chase boats.
3 Northern caught in the tourney and 2 of them being these guys.. 1 Perch caught in the tourney and the sole catcher being these guys.. Oh, and by the way it’s a GIANT perch in the standard of Gull Lake.. Oh, And they place in multiple tourneys nearly every year… Oh, and they drive up from where, Ohio to do this?
Yeah, guilty as the day is long. Sorry, but they are.
Im just curious – have there been past cases showing HOW people cheat, or speculation how these guys do it? Does it get more sophisticated than just hiding fish in your sled?
I’m imagining a nearby wheelhouse with a spear hole and scuba diver…
I bet they have a scuba diver attaching the fish underwater. LOL
I did read a quote from one of the winners who caught one of the pike. He said someone near him (didn’t specific if it was his buddy or not) had just caught a pike and he told him at 10 feet. So he went to 10 feet and there it was! Another pike. They were fishing in over 50 feet of water. It sure as heck seems suspicious but I will leave it at that until more “news” breaks.
I bet they have a scuba diver attaching the fish underwater. LOL
I did read a quote from one of the winners who caught one of the pike. He said someone near him (didn’t specific if it was his buddy or not) had just caught a pike and he told him at 10 feet. So he went to 10 feet and there it was! Another pike. They were fishing in over 50 feet of water. It sure as heck seems suspicious but I will leave it at that until more “news” breaks.
The thing about the guy’s story is that his relative registered the first pike, and he registered the second. The third pike was registered 2 minutes AFTER both of the Ohio guys’ pike. The fact that he lied to a newspaper when literally anyone can look at the results and see he’s lying is pretty bold.
Here is the quote from the Strib article:
“I was targeting walleye,” Stephan Lyogky told the Pine and Lakes Echo Journal newspaper after winning the contest. He was fishing in 40 to 50 feet of water, he said. “I was paying attention to the guy next to me who caught a pike at 10 feet [deep]. I saw that and pulled up, and sure enough it was there.”
Also as someone in another thread pointed out, why are the most successful pike fishermen in the history of the tournament targeting walleye?
@Tindall According to a commenter on the Star Tribune article, they were seen sneaking onto the ice at the Forest Lake Fishapalooza in 2010 but no one was able to prove that they cheated. As far as I can tell, that contest stopped in 2012, citing low attendance.
I bet they have a scuba diver attaching the fish underwater. LOL
I did read a quote from one of the winners who caught one of the pike. He said someone near him (didn’t specific if it was his buddy or not) had just caught a pike and he told him at 10 feet. So he went to 10 feet and there it was! Another pike. They were fishing in over 50 feet of water. It sure as heck seems suspicious but I will leave it at that until more “news” breaks.
Here is the quote from the Strib article which quotes another newspaper article:
“I was targeting walleye,” Stephan Lyogky told the Pine and Lakes Echo Journal newspaper after winning the contest. He was fishing in 40 to 50 feet of water, he said. “I was paying attention to the guy next to me who caught a pike at 10 feet [deep]. I saw that and pulled up, and sure enough it was there.”
The thing is if you look at the registration times, the first 2 pike registered were this guy and his relative, the third pike was registered 2 minutes AFTER the 2 they caught. Also, why are the most successful pike fishermen in the history of the contest fishing for walleye?
@Tindall One of the commenters on the Strib article says this same family were seen sneaking into the contest area during the 2010 Forest Lake Fishapalooza which was the largest ice fishing tournament at the time. They used to claim $180k in prizes back then so it was a huge tournament, but it ended 2 years later due to low attendance.
Please copy/paste the story. It is behind a paywall.
Good for them! I don’t know them or agree with the accuracy of their luck.
I do fish the contest with 7 other of my friends. We all agree this is the most well ran contest we have ever been too.
Keep up the good work Brainerd JC’s. Thanks for the investigation.
Shawn
Please copy/paste the story. It is behind a paywall.
Brainerd ice fishing contest winners pass lie detector tests, can keep prizes
Ohio father and two sons had all caught winning fish.
By Dennis Anderson Star Tribune FEBRUARY 8, 2018 — 6:52PM
Three members of an Ohio family who registered winning fish in the Jan. 27 Brainerd Jaycees $150,000 Ice Fishing Extravaganza on Gull Lake have passed lie detector tests and will be allowed to keep their prizes, including a new GMC pickup, contest organizers said Thursday
Ivan Lyogky of Hartville, Ohio, and his sons Stephan and Rostik were tested separately by a licensed polygraph examiner and no deception regarding the contest was detected, the Jaycees said in a news release.
Stephan Lyogky won the contest and the pickup with a northern pike that weighed 3.10 pounds. Ivan Lyogky took third place with a 2.89-pound northern pike, and Rostik Lyogky captured 98th place with a 1.07-pound perch.
Ivan Lyogky won $1,000 for third place, and 98th place was good for a new ice auger.
Contest organizers said they received anonymous information after the contest that raised suspicions about the Lyogkys’ fish.
About 12,000 anglers participated in the contest, and only one angler other than Ivan and Stephan Lyogky registered a northern pike among the top 150 largest fish.
The only perch registered among the 150 largest fish was Rostik Lyogky’s, and at 1.07 pounds it appears to be larger than any perch netted in Gull Lake by the Department of Natural Resources during periodic fish surveys dating back three decades.
Winning anglers must take lie detector tests if asked by contest organizers, or forfeit their prizes.
Ivan Lyogky told the Star Tribune Monday morning that his fish and those of his sons were caught legally and according to contest rules. All three anglers would take lie detector tests, he said, adding that he had talked to a lawyer about suing contest organizers for defamation.
Contest chairman Shane Meyer said the investigation was necessary so participants are confident the event is on the up and up, and that anglers participate on a level playing field.
“We are pleased with the results of this inquiry and appreciate the cooperation of the Lyogky family to ensure to the sporting community that our event is fairly administered,” Meyer said in the news release. “We congratulate the Lyogky family, as well as all other anglers that participated in the contest this year. What we do makes such an enormous difference in our community.”
The contest, begun in 1991, is run entirely by volunteers and benefits more than 50 charities in the Brainerd area, with Confidence Learning Center the primary beneficiary.
Jaycees members have donated more than 550,000 volunteer hours organizing and running the contest, raising more than $3.3 million.
[email protected] 612-673-4424 stribdennis
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
