Anybody else read this article? I was surprised that there was not more buzz around the forums about this. I don’t want to create a giant storm, but personally I really have a hard time believing this fish is anywhere near 11 lbs. What does everyone else think?
IDO » Forums » Fishing Forums » Fishing by Species » Smallmouth & Largemouth Bass » Supposed “Near Record” WI Largemouth
Supposed “Near Record” WI Largemouth
-
Jake_APosts: 569August 29, 2012 at 6:25 pm #1095594
I saw this on Facebook…yeah nice fish, but it would be lucky to push 5lbs and 19-20″.
August 29, 2012 at 6:54 pm #1095606Add more photographic proof, add 2 with Bass on a Ruler, (1) Mouth Closed & Tail Pinched, Head against the Bumper Tab & (2) Just laying just above the ruler with all marks visible.
Should be easy with 2-people in the boat.
Here is my 21 1/4″ & I was by myself (1)Laying on ruler, (2)I’m holding against my arm/shoulder and taking photo. I calculated this at 6.0# (Length x Length x Length / 1,600)True, that one does not look to be the size claimed, at least it doesn’t look like it almost double mine.
P.S.: Her hands look bigger than her face, should be approx 1/2 that big since she’s holding it with arms stretched out to camera away from her body.
August 29, 2012 at 7:22 pm #1095619Here you go. How long is a typical woman’s middle finger, 3″ being on the high side? I got 7.25 middle fingers or about 22″ long, figuring her finger is 3″ long. That would put the fish at about 5-6lbs.
August 29, 2012 at 7:28 pm #1095621Was probably weighed on a 40 year old spring scale someones grandfather left him. Same type of people who post the pictures of 5-6lb 14″ largemouth. Buy a digital scale so you dont look like a [censored] when posting pictures!
August 30, 2012 at 7:15 am #1095731Kind of feel bad for this girl getting ripped on for thinking she caught an 11 pounder, but I would agree it barely even looks to be 6#.
My question is, why did this Gayne person even write this article?August 30, 2012 at 2:18 pm #1095774Hard to believe the author didnt do some research and ask a few avid anglers what they thought before running the story. But I guess thats just how its done now, send in a picture and tell them it is a 11lb largemouth and they will run it.
Tomorrow I’m going to send in a picture of the 10″ 3lb bluegill I’m going to catch.
August 30, 2012 at 4:56 pm #1095849Just for the sake of comparison to a fish of a known weight.
This picture from Tom Reddington is listed as 10.6lbs.
August 30, 2012 at 5:03 pm #1095853Look at the mouth. Tom’s fish could put her fish’s head in its mouth! What a beast!
August 30, 2012 at 5:16 pm #1095860Quote:
Look at the mouth. Tom’s fish could put her fish’s head in its mouth! What a beast!
B BK – can you do the photo shop thing with Toms fish using his right hand along with an estimate of the size of his right hand?
It’s pretty hard to fault the girl for this extreme over estimation.
Her boyfriend and the writer of the article on the other hand…..August 30, 2012 at 5:45 pm #1095872There is nothing in the picture that would give us an accurate estimate of length. His hands are partially blocked.
August 30, 2012 at 6:32 pm #1095883Quote:
It’s pretty hard to fault the girl for this extreme over estimation.
Her boyfriend and the writer of the article on the other hand…..
If her boyfriend told her this fish was 25″ long and 20-some inches in girth, I wonder what he said his . . .
aw, nevermind.
August 31, 2012 at 1:09 am #1095949I set a custom scale in my drafting software based on my wife’s finger width – 21/32″ As an additional comparison, a woman’s average ring size is size 6 to size 7. Ring size of 6.5 = .6666 which is also very close to what this scale measured in relationship to the inside diameter of her ring. So anyways, I see a bass that is 21 to 22 inches?? Nice fish, but I have a very difficult time believing 11#
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.