Someone said the measurements do not make sense. Do the math the(girth squared) x (length) divided by (800) = 78.8 ?????

Length/weight charts are what dont add up. The fish exceeds what a typical 53 inch fish should weigh by a significant amount. Noone argues that it doesnt weigh 78 1/2. Its got a big ol' belly on it. Guess hes lucky that he caught an anomaly, or unlucky according to him.

The whole story was published last year in Saltwater magazine. It was a 2 part story and had Al as he told the story to the writer.
There were many reasons the fish ruined his life. He allegedly received $250,000 for catching the fish. People were jealous of the money which today isn't a huge sum but 20 or 30 years ago was a fortune. many of the reasons in this thread also were true then...people didn't believe he really caught the fish. he as shunned by the community, his friends, even his family. It proved to be his undoing.

I have. It works out to almost 82 pounds--which is what the fish probably weighed when Al caught it, seeing as how it wasn't weighed in until hours later ;)

BTW, you use fork length, not overall length, for this formula. And fork length was the universal way to measure bass in 1982.

I dont care what the naysayers say.
when they bring in a 70 off their favorite jetty,
they can say what it was like.
I know that over the last two years I have told a varying recounts of catching my TWO keepers.
And, at each telling I was not lying. I was remembering it and reliving it as close as I could recall.

-m

I believe you did it!!!!!!! Later, L:cheers:
Later, L

I was going to ask if that length was fork length. I know in my grandfathers eyes and a lot of guys who fished back then that fork length was the only legitimate measurement. I went to the fish calculator and put in 54 length 34 girth and it came out to 78lbs. Seems pretty reasonable to me. If 54 is fork length, it could easily be 57 or 58" measured total length.

This may help! The charts that look at this stuff are just that, a "rule" of thumb. Its gust a general guide line. Some one sitting behind a desk gathering data. The information comes in from field people. The information supplied may be accurate; however it’s still just a guide line not gospel. Use people as a guide line. Just because a person is 5 feet tall doesn’t mean that all people 5 feet tall should weigh 120 pounds. Some may weigh, 95, others may weigh 210 pounds. I don’t see my wife’s fish on the chart that I look at. And I would think that their are a few different charts out there. Her fish was 44 inches long and weighed 49-8oz.
Later, L

here's a link to the math

http://www.sportsmans-nook.com/fishcalc.htm

it works out to the ounce...

54.5... 34

Rebel Windcheater it was, not a Bomber Long A. About " A Penn 710 doesn't hold enough 20# line for a striper to fight for close to 2 hours", how much time does that spool hold? You could have a fish at 20 yards in front of you for two hours, the length of line has nothing do do with the length of a fight. You're somehow trying to equate linear distance with measurement of time, and they don't fit.

Honestly who cares?

Seriously... thanks for knocking some sense into us...

(I seriously doubt any striper could fight for 2 hours)

haha:hihi:

A bass isn't going to sit still at 20 yards for 2 hours. Regardless of whether it's 8 lbs or 80 lbs.

Bass just don't have the stamina to fight that long. 20# mono won't hold up to the back and forth over a spinning reel's line roller and the rod's guides for that long. The only way a bass is going to take 4 hours to land is 1) it's a monster and 2) it's foul hooked, in which case it'll likely spool a 710. That's why it doesn't hold enough line for a 4 hour fight.

And you know what? There are few fishermen who have the strength and stamina to fight any fish for 2 hours, let alone 4. Especially standing up (not in a fighting chair or wearing a harness) on a jetty.

Look at the pictures of Al back then. Does he look like the fittest physical specimen you ever saw? ;)

I believe in my heart that Al truly caught that fish, and caught it fair and square. But I don't believe for a second that he fought it for 4 hours, or even an hour and forty minutes. His perception of time was affected by the circumstances of having what he knew was the fish of his lifetime on the end of the line. If someone was standing behind him, not personally involved in the fight, I'd be willing to bet it was on for less than an hour.

And among the things that Al has been consistent on over the years is that he caught it on an older style Rebel Windcheater.

I lost a fish last fall after fighting it for an hour. It was definately at least an hour as I walked into my spot at 10:40 pm, caught and released 2 real small fish in 3 casts, then caught the "lost fish" on the next cast. So I figure it took no longer then 20 minutes to catch 2 schoolies on 3 casts. So I hooked the fish no later than 11:00 pm and lost the fish at 12:00 AM. I had my cell in my hand when I lost it. It wasn't a case where the fish ran for 45 min... At times I sat on a rock just holding on wth neither me or the fish gaining for probably 15 min at a time. Don't know how big it was and considering the conditions it may not have been that huge. May have even been about dead, but I was never able to get the fish back against a strong current and couldn't move closer. Point is, most fights are much shorter than they feel, but after my experience I can imagine how a world record size fish could take a real long time to land.

I've beaten 50#'s in less than 10 mins and have had 30-40# fish take longer, but there is no striped bass around that is gonna take me 4 hours to land, maybe an hour tops, but no way 4. Al did catch that fish, but I think he took liberties with the fish tale afterwards :)

MikeP summed it up about the line roller and guides eating up that 20# mono over a 4 hour battle, would'nt stand a chance.