Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Yea, Field and Stream article says he's caught 3 60's in the past year.
-spence
|
Actually, it was four 60s and a 58. And those are just the fish he entered in the Cup. You're only allowed to have your 3 best fish stay on the board. He might have caught others that he either released, or that were entered and displaced. Also, according to the F&S article, he released one that he estimated to be well over 70 a few years back.
F&S appears to have talked to the guy personally (and probably paid for the rights to an "exclusive"), whereas OTW got their info yesterday from a CT beat writer who talked to other "credible sources" who may not have been all that credible. So, I put more stock in today's F&S article. The guy did go to the hospital, that's true, but it wasn't for a panic attack. He apparently took a fall out on the water and hurt his ribs, and went to have them checked out. This is from his own mouth. He left a couple of mob scenes to have a chance to catch his breath. He already stated what tackle he used--a heavy 6-1/2' St Croix tuna rod, a Quantum Cabo reel, and 50# Berkley Gorilla Braid. I fully expect him to submit the paperwork, based on his statement that "he'd be an ass" if he didn't. He didn't have to do that yesterday, and he doesn't have to do that today, or tomorrow or for almost another month. There's nothing more that he has to do.
If the guy fishes from a tin boat, he caught the fish inshore. He's not running out to federal waters south of the Block to poach in the EEZ in a #^&#^&#^&#^&ing tin boat. The redness on the fish is pretty normal. The fish lays in a box, and the blood pools in the low points of the body where it comes into contact with the box. It's what's called post-mortem lividity, and it's perfectly normal---it's not net rash. I have quite a few pictures of bass less than half that size with the same redness. There's nothing suspicious in my mind at this point. OTW did everyone an extreme dis-service yesterday by spreading some wild rumors, IMO.
As far as the 54" thing goes---anyone want to take a stab at the length of McReynolds' fish? I'll save you the trouble of looking it up--it was 53-1/2" long, but it had something like a 35" girth.