So did anyone else notice in the field and stream photo gallery - Pic of fish that Ken posted here showing it is 49" with the tape laid flat on the ground. Another picture on field and stream showing the tape at 54" on the tail - showing the tail only. So the measurement is clearly wrong by 5"!!!!

After seeing the pics on FS I dont believe it for a sec. Im entitled to my opinion and that fish is a big fish, 50-55lbs tops.... Ill give that. EVERYBODY I know who consistantly catch big fish dont believe it. We all want the record to be broken, would be awesome to see! There is no need for photagraphy tricks, etc... There are pictures on FS where the fish is laid out or held against the body where I say no way.... Most guys I know throw a fish on the deck and can guess the wieght, coming within a pound or of the actual wieght. Im guessing alot of guys who thing this fish is 81lbs have not seen many bass and never a 40, 50 or 60 for that matter. Agian just my opinion...

Remember all the controversey on the WR Fluke?? Look, I had friends that saw AL Mcreynolds fish, it was laid out at the tackle shop for all to see... There was no question the size of that fish, none.. Nobody wants to see legitamate record holders cheated, I think thats what most feel....


I guess I am also privy to more info which I cannot post on here... Look back at the posts and look who was the first to say that it was Greg Meyerson?

His actions have not been normal at all through this whole thing and I bet nobody here would have acted the same...

I was out in that area wens. night and had a big fish break me off. I lost the leader.

Sea story? Or no sheet?

You should describe the leader / hook to G.M. and see if it looks the same ;)

Wouldn't that be something! :) To me , that would be a question worth asking Paul! :)

;):):wave:

A quick look at a few length - weight charts shows that, based on scientific studies and metrics, that a bass would need to 55" + to be in the 80lb. range.

49-54" bass = 39-73 lbs..

81.88 lbs. of something hung from that scale, and it would put all this speculation to bed if the fish were opened up for inspection.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I hope you realize that by these accusations, you're also accusing Jack Katzenbach, the owner of the weigh station, with being in cahoots with this guy in perpetrating this hoax, and possibly for attesting to all of his "questionable" fish. You're saying none of his fish, for which weigh slips were submitted in a major tournament, are legit, so you're saying that one or more weighmasters are committing fraud in cahoots with a cheating angler.

Those are pretty strong accusations, Kenny. I hope for your sake, and the sake of your reputation in the angling world, you're in a position to back them up with proof.

Congrats on a nice fish.....

WR.. Just not feeling it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I caught enough fish to know bs, Yeah never a 70 or 80, but that aint 80, ill bet my life on it common, are we insane here!!!!!!! you seriously believe it? I was out to dinner with my buddy who's 8 -11 year old kids that caught 40's looked at that fish and said it was bull#^&#^&#^&#^&... feel free to call me Mike 201 412-5783.. I dont have to hide behind the computer, he fed up by submitting those pics to FS it doesnt add up.. 49-50 inch no girth, no shoulders and its 81.88!!! 80 percent of the people on the barn are calling it BS, 100 percent of my friends are...

Nebestadomous has spoken.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It amazes me how catches of big fish can bring out the worst in people.
I've see it 1st hand by a few on this board who take the OTW striper cup way too serious, for what ? a stupid pin or a cup with bragging rights to say I'm better that you, who the #^&#^&#^&#^& cares..

Actually, using the time honored seat of the pants estimator, length times girth squared dividied by 800, a 54" fish with a 35" girth would weigh........82.6875 pounds. ;)

I did this with the reported dimensions of McReynolds' fish, 53-1/2" length and 35" girth, and it comes out at...81.92 pounds.

People regularly cheat in tournaments!!! Hows the weighmaster going to know if the fish has been stuffed or not unless they rip the fish apart. I wouldnt if I owned a tackleshop, as you have money to make. However, if your scale is certified, you get a reading and fill out the affidavit. From the weighmaster's point of view, what are you gonna do even if you suspect cheating?

You can't take the OTW tournament too seriously as it is a fish stuffers dream. Bring your fish in to a local tackle shop with a clueless employee and you can turn a 50" 38 pounder into a 50 lber pretty easily. We had threads last year about this. Good guys being accused of stuffing, cheated, blah blah. Lie detectors came up, but theyre not 100% dead on. I just like to see things straight up across the board and it gets old hearing about so and so cheating, when they really arent. A few bad ruins it for all. You can have your 10k prize.

In this case we're talking world record status, so I hope if the state of CT certifies it as a record, igfa or whoever, a state bioligist looks at it to confirm theres no tampering. I hope for greg's sake they are already undergoing these investigations to clear up the accusations of cheating. Theres no reason why this can't be accurately documented. IF the fish is not inspected there is not much credibility plain and simple. Really anyone could go in with a 50" fish (easy to come by) and get fancy stuffing it to make it the record - I'd like to see some proof to make this a little more credible.

Thanks Mike!

:-)


+1 Rizzo!
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why is everyone doing the calc at 54"? Am I missing something or does the picture not show the length at 49", therefore, according to the "formula" makes it impossible to be 80 pounds unless the fish has the girth of a 55 gallon drum.

I dont think this brings out the worst in people, as a new record is good for publicity for striper fishing, if its a legit record!

Kenny, I've seen pictures where it looks legit, and pictures where it looked 50-ish, depending on the camera angle and how it was held. All I know it that there are multiple reports of it being weighed on a certified scale in front of a lot of people. I don't know the guy. I don't know your friends, and I don't post on or read the bass barn. I know you catch a lot of fish every year, and I know that I've looked at pictures, called BS, and was proven wrong before. The bottom line for me is, some guy is putting his business reputation on the line by attesting to and submitting weigh slips for this guy, and with the prizes that are at stake in the Striper Cup, falsifying those could be a felony in many states, and would be one in Massachusetts. I have to think that a tackle shop owner would be very reluctant to do that for me, not matter how good a friend I was or how much coin I dropped in there every year.

I'll try to give you a call tonight after dinner. If not then, tomorrow afternoon.

That beat writer interviewed Greg before F&S and didn't have to pay for it:

Story and Photos: Potential World Record Striper

Mike, have you seen me argue a catch before, comon, have you seen one shot of a prestine looking fish from him? 49"-50" and 801.88lbs.. Does anybody feel like Pete Vican is being cheated here? My ENTIRE TEAM WILL BOYCOTT the striper cup if they allow this fish and other teams as well! Let him take it to and IGFA Certified wieghmaster, lenght and girth measurements... Submit it to the IGFA and put the story to sleep.. all this drama is BS... Guess OJ was innocent, casey Anthony too...

I officially couldn't care less if its legit or not....and why do people get their panties in a bunch??? Envy???? Good for him on a great catch for cryin' out loud! That is all.

Envy ain't it Larry.

A burden of proof must be met before The Holy Grail can change hands.

Too many things seem askew with this fish for folks to accept a certified weight ALONE as the word of God.

Had the guy handled this better, ie more transparently, we would all be smooching his arse and patting his back.

For his sake I hope it is a 100% legitimate record, but he's got some proving to do before I can accept the record has fallen.

Luv ya Larry,

Jon
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I did not see the fish in person and not sure if you did Ken or any of your friends, so all we have is witness accounts and photos I guess. I don't see anything bulging out of the belly or any suspicion of stuffing 20 to 30 pounds of whatever(baitfish,rocks,crabs,lead,ice etc.).

How do you know he has not or is going to open it up? Does he really have to anyway?
Glad I did not catch it, holy crap



Best thing I can say is go out and catch one bigger :D

"Does anybody feel like Pete Vican is being cheated here?"
Why would he be cheated? Didn't he catch one hell of a fish himself? I'm glad for him.

"Envy????"

Penis envy !

Agree with Slip. Why would Peter Vican feel cheated?

Looking at the leader board, if Peter could put up a fish of around 66 pounds, he could still take the Angler of the Year award. If he could do that, all he'd be "cheated" out of would be a free replica mount. I'm sure he's already sent his 77.40 out if he wanted a mount. ;)

Guy's caught two fish over 75 the last two seasons, so another 66 isn't all that far-fetched.

Questions regarding the image of the bass measuring at 51"

I took the image from F&S, enlarged it (correctly, resampling 110% several times) and to me, it appears as though the tape measure is not flat on the ground but lifted up a bit where held. That, coupled with the bottom left location where the snapshot was taken, would make the "51 inches" getting tossed around shorter than the actual length due to the perspective of the shot.

I'm 20 something years past my higher-math prime (pun?) so I don't have the mental capacity to crunch without disastrous effect, but I can and did simulate my theory scaled down a bit and confirm - good enough for me - that the fish is longer than 51"s.

Someone smarter than me please confirm this - or debunk it :tooth: - mathematically...

Re-sized image:

http://www.striped-bass.com/images/w...4-enlarged.jpg

Is that what "angler of the year " gets you, a free replica mount ?
WOW !
:yak5:

Well lets see if he gets it certified IGFA world record, I bet not!

You see the 2" in front of head? I mean common... Who would take a pic like this? would you?? Be honest John! The fish was never rewieghed on a certified scale! There is a reason 80 % of the people on some of the other forum polls think its BS!!!

Sorry, man. Whoever does their web page and Facebook updates did you a real dis-service yesterday. That's where this nonsense about a "panic attack" based on reports of "credible sources" started.

No, it gets a bunch of tackle prizes and maybe some other stuff. Redlite would be able to tell you exactly what--he's won the shore side of it twice, too. I think the surf guy gets a Van Staal among other stuff. The free mount is of the biggest boat and shore bass weighed in. Sometimes, that person isn't the Angler of the Year.

The mounts aren't really that expensive. The company that does them had a booth last year and I think they were around $400 as a "show special".

I gotta run down for dinner, then I'll probably hit the Canal for awhile. I'll try to give you a call tomorrow, or at least I'll leave you my cell number on your voice mail if you're out on the water. I really don't want to get involved in this, but I'm a sucker for behind the scenes intrigue. :rotf2:

Angle - I am being honest. That photo does not represent 51 inches for me, or anything less than 51 inches. Using that photo as the claim for 51 inches doesn't wash with me. I have not seen anything concrete to debunk that this is not what it is claimed to be.

I see a lot of people trying to debunk it but I have not seen enough to to convince me this is not legit.

NEBESTAMOMUS HAS SPOKEN!!!:fishin:

Sorry John I don't buy it. That tape isn't bent. It's straight out. And laid under his dorsal fin. That fish measures less than 50" in that picture.

Tape is not flat on the ground. The zero is, the hand is not. It is below the dorsal in front and several inches above the tail.

More reading: Story and Photos: Potential World Record Striper

Didn't say the tape was flat I said it was straight. It's VERY close to being flat on the ground though...and not enough error to make this a 54" fish. If you can prove the Pythagorean theorem wrong your a better man than me. There couldn't possibly be enough parallax in that picture to make up for 3-4" If the tape was further away sure. Not from what I see. Just saying. Don't really care one way or another. Just sorry to see another fish dead for a #^&#^&#^&#^&ing tournament.

That tape isn't all the way on the ground yet.

No way that tape in the picture is flat to the ground. It was shot either as he was putting it down or lifting it up.

But why on earth would anybody take a pic this way?????? Common