do the math on this one..
 

36" G, 53" L

Wow! you made the best of some warm weather - Nice catch!

I wish that was me.. but it is not-Chesapeake bay fish- caught and released after measurement.

85.86?

heres another shot-

C&R guys use this formula- Length X Girth squared, divided by 800 = weight in pounds. I come up with 86 LBS!! if this is true, we are looking at a new world record folks.

That fish is purty...and caught in a jon boat to boot.

WOW !!! better go find the find the honey, something came up.

Not a beliver in the "Formula", but that is one awesome blimp of a fish. Kudos to them for releasing it too.

not disputing the math,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
as my numbers are the same; YET~~

wasn't the McReynolds Farce caught
on 20#test line?? what test did this boater use?

just curious and unsure of where the IGFA
stands on this one when comparing weights.

ALSO, wouldn't the feesh have to be weighed
on a certified scale to overtake the current WR??

THAT is a BEAUTY, though!!
:claps: :claps: :claps:

wow....what a fish! ......and she's still swimming :bl:. hats off for a job well done.

Wow.It looks like a pig.I don't have as much a problem with the formula as I do the measurement part of the formula.I have seen many different ways to measure a fish.Some are not so good.Thats besides the point anyways.It sure looks like a nice fish.
Nebe,What other info can you give on it..

chesapeake, boat, released after measuring and photo...thats all I got NIB

that guy is the captian sullyburger of fishing in my eyes.. takes a confident guy to let a fish like that swim away..

I think it was caught on a 14 inch surf hog pleasure stick :rotfl:

BassDawg, aWorld Record is one in the same regardless of what pound test you are using. There are line class records and they are a pain in the ass to verify.Obviously this angler doesn't care to have the headache McReynolds had.I sure would love to bottom out my boga some day.That is a well fed animal,kinda like NIB after PITS.

funny stuff SeaDangles and thanks
for the clarification, i was certain that there
were two types of WR,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

i dunno, Chris, those "kinds of headaches" i'll take,
while most of it was self-induced, imho,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

i believe that it also has to do with the fact
that there were two anglers involved with Ole Albert's feesh.
also, 20# test, tied direct, for a 78.8# Striper seems miraculous, AT BEST!!
:tooth: :deadhorse: :tooth:

BD, if you want miraculous then try 56lb. 14oz. on 6lb. test by Landon at Gay Head in 'Oct '81. More recently we have a 50lb 9oz. specimen caught on 2 lb. test in VA. on Dec 30 '07.Even Crazy Alberto claimed to have caught a 45lb. 5 oz. lunker on 8 lb. test with a plug no less. All of these catches make MacReynolds tale easier to swallow IMO.

bravo on the release that is one mother of slob

Its never easy to take exact measurements when the fish is alive and kicking... Keep a scale with you at all times...although my best fish come when i forget the scale or camera... if that was an 80# bass, you just released THOUSANDS of dollars in endorsements... if it was 70#, glad shes swimming... if it was 80#, I'd be kicking myself... and not knowing would probably haunt me. *(all that B.S aside, nice catch! glad she's out there breeding)

I also think that the "formula" is based on fork length, not total length?? :confused:

SD, i hear ya about the verified records and some anglers
specialize their catches in that manner. although that "style"
of fishing is NOT for me, as that is the epitome of machismo BS!!

i view McReynolds as more of a Ham&Egger, who
got VERRRRY lucky(right time/right place/i'm aware that a degree of LUCK is
part and parcel to ALL big catches) and who's catch will ALWAYS be tainted, imho,
from the very second that his buddy grabbed his hoodie.

at that POINT in the fight it was no longer man vs fish;
but it became 2 men vs 1 striper. don't get me wrong, i
don't think that his buddy shouldn't have saved him,
it's just that, in my view, at that crossroads in the battle
MoSaxxy won the fight!!!

i never, EVER, would proclaim that fish to be the World Record.
Cinto's Striper is the WR i acknowledge; but, the good part of seeing
a COW of that size down at the OBX is this~~~

SHE'LL be 90#'s or better this FALL and hopefully~~~
"she'll be coming around my preferred lie when SHE comes!!"
:jump: :jump: :jump: :jump:

holy crap! just to know the possibility that she's out there.i'mma comin for ya!congrats on your catch.insane!

and SHE'S not alone, gents!!!

however, please correct me if i'm WRONG, but
doesn't the latest science now state that the
BEST breeders are those girls in the 25#-35# class?

doesn't the fecundity ratio greatly diminish the older the BIG GALS get?
while it IS true that they drop more eggs; is it also true that their eggs
aren't as fertile as the fewer eggs that the younger gurls drop?

still trying to figure out this whole "best breeders of the species" science?
:huh: :huh: :huh:

OK, you asked.
This was all hashed out last year http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripert...ight=fecundity. You clearly didn't believe it then, and apparently still don't want to believe it. Fecundity, egg quality, genetic quality, and population breeding success all improve with older fish. Here is one of many references again. Why not read it, Bass Dawg, and hopefully stop spreading a misleading myth that rationalizes killing the most valuable fish in the population? If the whole thing is too detailed, scroll 1/2 way through to the subtitle regarding age and fecundity. http://hmsc.oregonstate.edu/HsO/PDF/...0Fisheries.pdf . Thanks

PS Here's another http://www.science.calwater.ca.gov/p..._fecundity.pdf

Nice fish...congrats to the angler....:cheers:

very nice fish,i bet they were targeting muskie or some other freshwater species and that is why it might have been released

Where was it caught? Never mind I just read.:rollem: Nice fish

Caught in a state that has a law that makes possession of striped bass illegal this time of year- ;)

EZ there big fella!
:lasso: :lasso:

i did say, "Please, correct me if i am WRONG".
i am on the side of the best science available,

thanks George for posting those links, :kewl: :kewl: :kewl:
and i WILL reread them and try to retain them THIS time.
i still doan think i could've released her.

i am quite shore that SHE is just one of HUNDREDS and perhaps 1,000's.

if she is INDEED from the Classes of '89,'93, or '96~~~
by the way, they were ALL banner YOY#'s for each year~~
and each class of yearmates would be 19yo, 15yo, and 13yo respectively.
1996 was thru the roof!!

these next two or three years should be amazing and we should see fish of this size and greater, often. POTENTIALLY, the IGFA will be shattered and we could sea sum AMAZING catches from the shore as well!! i know i'll be loaded for MOBY'S next Fall, will YOU :huh: :huh: :huh:

sooooo, approximately, how old is an 85#'er anyways??
:eek5: :eek5: :eek5: :eek5:

survival %'s ?
 

thats a gorgeous fish, and it was very commendable releasing it,
however i wonder what its odds of recuperating were after being held up by the gill like that. quite a bit of pressure there.
too bad it wasn't supported horizontally, or w/ a boga grip.
any thoughts ?

was kindof thinking the same thing... kind of like punching an 85 year old man in the face, dragging him out of his house into the front yard and then lifting him up by his ears... he's not going to just walk back inside and watch jeopardy like nothing happened when you let him go...

One beautiful cow. 19+/- years old and max weight app. 68 lbs. She was probably loaded with eggs. Lifting a fish that large by the gills probably killed the big girl.

McReynolds was far from a ham and egger. He was known as a competent fisherman in the Atlantic City area and always placed high in the various club tournaments down there.

There are at least 5 confirmed, legit catches (even if YOU don't consider McReynolds to be legit) as big or bigger than Cinto's. Cinto's fish was never a world record, and was never submitted for one because it was caught illegally under IGFA rules--on wire line. It was also caught on a lure with multiple treble hooks, which also made it illegal under IGFA rules at the time. Charlie's a swell guy, and we all love him to pieces, but his fish isn't even a state record in Mass--it's a co-record with two other fish the same weight--Tony Stetzko's 73 from shore, and Charles Church's 73 from 1912. Bob Rochetta from NY has a 76, if you don't want to acknowledge McReynolds fish--in fact, that fish was the record that McReynolds broke.

look how small Church's bass looks and its 73 lbs.. http://www.tattoostackle.com/yestery...s/73lbs_lg.jpg

AMEN!

nice work, Mike, in setting the record straight.
i had forgotten about the Rochetta record at 76.
thank you for jogging my memory. Rochetta is tha man!!
not taking anything away from Charlie, who is amazing.

i also was not aware of McReynolds' success down south and
i will retract my statement of his ham&eggedness; however,
i still think that he made a "bad call" to submit that particular
fish for an IGFA ruling ~~especially so, since he knew better than
anyone how it ALL went down,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,very suspect, imho.

that 85.56#'er above just confirms that there ARE sum
MONSTERS out there, still kicking arse and taking names.

i mean if 85+ is being caught from a boat, then that bodes well for us surfrats, wouldn't ya say???
:cool: :cool: :cool:

I was thinking the same thing. But then again it has a hell lot more chance of living when they put it back in the water then if it went to the cooler. Ive seen bass with 5-6" holes in their sides with organs visible that fought like hell. I think bass are a lot tougher then people think.

This is not all that clear. Last year I tried to find a definitive answer on this (because I like to weigh large fish). What is involved is something called an "isthmus injury" which, as best I can determine is the result of over stretching the narrow spot where the gills meet the mouth (i.e., the throat). There seemed to be good data that snook did not tolerate this well. There was also good data that holding very large muskies (40+ lb fish) vertically by the gill cover had no effect on survival. Certainly largemouth bass get handled this way all the time and seem to survive it. I don't think a scale or a boga grip is any better than a gill cover grab, indeed the gill cover grip probably distributes strain more evenly. I think the bigger problem is time out of water in the warm months. Experience has taught me it is very hard to revive a large fish that has fought hard, then been weighed and photographed on an August night.

It the one thing that makes us all chubby chasers, big cow bass. And it waslove at first sight with the above specimen.

yep, and you know his wife is a 6 footer
nice try though

I commend them for releasing that fish and following the law. I'm sure there are others out there like her swimming around also.

i agree

I don't trust the measurements of a live struggling cow in a Jon Boat in the dark to be accurate-- just estimates... :gf:

Of course always hard to tell fish weight from any pic! -- yet I've won quite a few bets with friends doing just that. Huge Bass here for sure! ... but to my eye lacks the super- full/ grossly- huge belly of the 78 lb. record fish. To me she's exactly how I see Tonys' Bertha or Cintos' fish: approx. 73 lbs.


VERY happy about the release! :humpty:

But: NEVER handle a Cows' Gill area at all! ... or weigh it suspended by the mouth at all! ... if intending to release it! Loved the Skinner book for the most part... but very surprised he still lip- weighs big Bass he's intending to release afterward? (IS exact weight vs. eye- ball estimate so necessary with released big Bass... esp. to guys who find & land a lot? :huh: )


THAT said: I do agree with Chef & Bart-- even mishandled & abused during release... big Bass are very hardy creatures (& survive release way more than stats. say IMO)! Oxygen depletion/ time out of water before release is the single biggest factor limiting that fishs' survival rate! (you want that picture-- BE PREPARED ALWAYS!... so you can do it in a flash! (not in 5 minutes! :exp: )

I go back and forth, but I did photograph a 67 pounder this past September, 31.5 girth, 56 length. 69.45 so it's usually close anyway.