Best place to buy plugs ?

[Joe]

Tackle Direct - they have the slimmest margins....I'd go there instead of paying the high prices the sponsors here charge.

[zacs]

Originally Posted by Joe

Tackle Direct - they have the slimmest margins....I'd go there instead of paying the high prices the sponsors here charge.

Another vote for SCRI & SWE.

Awesome thread!!!

[BassDawg]

riverrat and bart ,

The numbers don't lie, and
I'm sure that Vic knows that as well .

Short of you doing the math yourself, here is the formula that i used and it is the same one employed by the good folks at OTW for their Striper Cup: girth x girth x length/800 = pounds of striper.

Vic's fish, 21" x 21" x 49" = 21609~~~~21609/800 = 27.01#

BD's fish, 25" x 25" x 43" = 26875~~~~26875/800 = 33.59#

Also, iffin you were to look at gonefishin's chart, then you would find that my numbers are within the normal range of stripers that are 43" overall ~with the average being placed at 32#'s. Not too sure where ya come up with yer numbers riverrat, must be Rhody racers yer thinkin' of???

I know, i know riverrat.........it does seem kinda crazy, but there are some BIGGUNS layin' up in me honey cove. Ya should've been there the night I brought in a monstah way toooo green and she snapped 40# flouro like it was a guitar string. She made my 43"er look like a dink. I mean theys sum real FATTY'S up in there, and it is possible that Vic's feesh was a skinny beetch. Either that, or she could've been fooled by that black mambo before the fattening up stage had happened .

The more I think about it the more I think that Vic's numbers must be off. Wouldn't the girth on a 49"er be bigger than 21"??? Doan know, since I cain't say that I've ever landed one that LAHHHHGE!

[Mike P]

I can remember when most every 43" fish was 30+, and most 46" fish were 40+----when we had a lot of big bait around

[riverrat2]

I got my numbers from real life experience not some equation that is used to boost C&R advocates ego's. I've weighed fish and used that equation, its always on the heavy side. The only numbers that truely don't like are the ones on the scale.

[BassDawg]

Just a little more info about me honey hole...........

There is a huge outer promintory, or small island type rock that is flanked by reefs to the north, a channel laced with bowls/pockets/and rips back into the isle, and a series of reefs that end at the mouth of a huge cove, that is filled with lobster pots.

That rock is reachable at an hour before Low, and castable at all times. It protects the outside from this sweet little boulder field that dumps into the rip between the above mentioned reefs, and a second set of reefs that form where the boulders stop and then they also meet on the southern end of the outer reefs and they all meet at the lobster pots that litter the mouth of this large cove.

Been mostly successful with chunks and eels, though a coupla times danny's and spooks have been the ticket for yer 36"-39" fatty's. Gonna pound the place with burgundy headed/blk bucktailed jigs and burgundy/white, and white/white next year. But so far BAIT has been the key to this very feeshnominal spot, and the BIG GURLS just keep getting bigger each year.......................

[BassDawg]

Originally Posted by riverrat2

I got my numbers from real life experience not some equation that is used to boost C&R advocates ego's. I've weighed fish and used that equation, its always on the heavy side. The only numbers that truely don't like are the ones on the scale.

Agreed, riverrat, real life/feel is often the best way to "guage" the weight of our catches. Pretty much all of my first 30 keepers were in the 32"- 37" avg OA length. So, i know a 20# - 28# striper when I pick it up to unhook it and eyeball the length before I release it. But this season, using eeeeeels, has put some significantly bigger beeeotches on the end of my line. Since I believe so strongly in C&R, this seems to be the best way to account for the girth to length ratio.

Just a couple of questions.....................
Don't fish LOSE weight the longer they are out of the water?
Unless you had yer scale on the rocks wit ya, that may account for some of the discrepency. That is, iffin ya used the C&R Formula hours earlier at the rocks and then thru yer catch on a scale much later.

Secondly,
What kind of scale are you using? Many of the spring loaded hand held scales are less accurate the closer they get to their max. It's kinda like the difference between triple beams and digital. I learned back in the 70's that if you ain't usin' digitals when it comes to "weight", then somebody's getting ripped off ~dude !

Doan so much think that it is about ego, bro, as it is about calculating a general formula that provides the quickest way to approximate weight ~within a reasonably acceptable proximity of true weight~ that accounts for variance of girth as it relates to overall length in the real and earnest effort to release a catch in a safe and timely manner.

Think about it....................a 25" girth on a 43" feesh!! She was FAT and she was every bit of 30#, me bruddah. Also, I just use the formula because most of us agree that it is fair and "accurate" enough.

[bloocrab]

BDawg,

That's a LOT of fish/handling for a guy big into C&R -

A spring loaded scale requires a lot less handling and is probably just as accurate as calculating a guesstimated calculated weight. Just meye opinion anyways-

..and down deep, you NO you're a chest beeeter.






Sidenote: Getting back on track......SUPPORT OUR S.B.COM SPONSORS....whether buying direct OR from a shop sponsor, you can't go wrong.