Paul D Posted June 10, 2007 Report Share Posted June 10, 2007 1st Mark Bessant Conger 52lb 130.00% 2nd Daniel Chapman Conger 40lb 100.00% 3rd= Charlie Chapman Black Bream 3lb 6oz 96.43% 3rd= Dave Mayne Bream Black 3lb 6oz 96.43% 5th Robert Fuller(jnr) Pouting 2lb 12oz 91.67% 6th Clive Tyler Bream Black 3lb 85.71% 7th Paul Dore Conger 33lb 82.50% 8th Bob Fuller Bream Black 2lb 12oz 78.57% 9th Ryan Bessant(jnr) LS Dogfish 2lb 4oz 75.00% 10th Carl Hurren Bream Black 2lb 8oz 71.43% 11th Gordon Moore LS Dogfish 2lb 2oz 70.83% 12th Adam Franklin Pollack 10lb 62.50% 13th Dominic Taylor Tope 7lb 15.56% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swainiac Posted June 10, 2007 Report Share Posted June 10, 2007 Nice one mate............no comments about the conger cuddling or the jig around the deck. Well done buddy..............Nippers on form .....again!!! Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boybilly Posted June 10, 2007 Report Share Posted June 10, 2007 Well done Mark, nice fish. Nice to see Ryan mentioned as well. Seen the piccie Rich, thought you had found a new dating site. Regards, BB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DommyBoy Posted June 11, 2007 Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 So i came last then! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Fox Posted June 11, 2007 Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 Some great fish there. Well done all. Anyone fish overnight at all? Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
great white Posted June 11, 2007 Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 Thanks Paul, for organising the event and results And Thanks to Paul Frey's very generous loan of a boat, we managed not only to get out and have a good trip but also get on the results sheet. Thanks to everyone who took the time to enter and I hope you enjoyed your fishing as much as we did Charlie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Afishionado Posted June 11, 2007 Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 Not for any other reason than I can't stand the pressure I don't enter the comps'. But some times it leaves me wondering how I would have got on if I had. Therefore I wonder if somone would kindly work out for me where I would have been placed with the two rays I caught on Sunday. First was an Undulate that was caught uptiding on a fresh mackerel head, she was about 18lb as far as I gould measure and I am going on the lower side. The next from the same spot about 2 hours later but on the flood not the ebb was a clonking great Thornback well heavier than the Undulate and weighing somewhat over 20lb. This was caught downtiding with a large mackerel fillet. Both fish fought well but the Thornback was a beast to bring in. Making it's way uptide and stripping line off the reel like mad, it did this three times in all leaving me slightly shattered but happy Both fish were returned. Unfortunately no proper pictures but we got som on the mobile phones camera and Mark is going to try to extract them so I can get them on my PC. Mad Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncan Posted June 11, 2007 Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 (edited) Not for any other reason than I can't stand the pressure I don't enter the comps'. But some times it leaves me wondering how I would have got on if I had. Therefore I wonder if somone would kindly work out for me where I would have been placed with the two rays I caught on Sunday. First was an Undulate that was caught uptiding on a fresh mackerel head, she was about 18lb as far as I gould measure and I am going on the lower side. The next from the same spot about 2 hours later but on the flood not the ebb was a clonking great Thornback well heavier than the Undulate and weighing somewhat over 20lb. This was caught downtiding with a large mackerel fillet. Both fish fought well but the Thornback was a beast to bring in. Making it's way uptide and stripping line off the reel like mad, it did this three times in all leaving me slightly shattered but happy Both fish were returned. Unfortunately no proper pictures but we got som on the mobile phones camera and Mark is going to try to extract them so I can get them on my PC. Mad Mike 1st & 18lb 4oz would have got you 2nd.............but as you can only weigh in 1 fish of each species you would have been disqualified so all's well..........honours even etc - you get the message (either fish could have been the winner) Edited June 11, 2007 by duncan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Fox Posted June 11, 2007 Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 Brilliant Mike ! Worth registering them both officially I suspect. Was it anywhere near the spot you told me? Saw you coming back in on Sunday on the approaches to the chain ferry, but you seemed a little preoccupied. That broken down Sunseeker was in an interesting place, eh? Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Afishionado Posted June 11, 2007 Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 (edited) Brilliant Mike ! Worth registering them both officially I suspect. Was it anywhere near the spot you told me? Saw you coming back in on Sunday on the approaches to the chain ferry, but you seemed a little preoccupied. That broken down Sunseeker was in an interesting place, eh? Mike Sorry we missed you Mike. We were a bit aghast at the sight of a yacht tacking out across the bows of the ferry about 10 foot from the edge of it!! The bloke must have been balmy!! Then having slipped round the back of Bramblebush Bay ourselves we were confronted with three stationary boats playing blind mans buff with a towing line. Mind you with 115 horses on yer bum one has the comforting feeling that you can always stop or go whenever one wants. Fish wise, yes in that vacinity. We started the day feathering for mackerel that were very few and far apart, but by chugging along at 1 or 2 knts feathering as we went it gave me and Mark a chance to really keep an eye on the bottom read out from the sonar. We were further out than I usualy go in that area about 75ft. when Mark spotted a nice convex undulation only about 5 ft high with a little hollow on either side. So we pulled in our lines and after a bit of buggering around we found the area again and anchored up on the highest bit so we would fish into the dip on either side whichever the way the tide ran. Loads of LSD's, a few Bream, and Rays. Mad Mike Edited June 11, 2007 by Afishionado Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnasher Posted June 11, 2007 Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 (edited) Brilliant Mike ! Worth registering them both officially I suspect. Well done mate, a couple of beauties. U should of entered the comp, a bit of friendly compitition would of done you the world of good . I'm not sure if they will let the fish be recorded as they wernt weighed. The fish recorder wouldn't accept my cod brace in December as the weights were only guess weights as i never had scales on board. Edited June 11, 2007 by Gnasher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Afishionado Posted June 11, 2007 Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 Quote.....The fish recorder wouldn't accept my cod brace in December as the weights were only guess weights as i never had scales on board. That is not logical! The whole thing is done on an honour system any way! So how does one prove the fish were weighed, by making up a set of lb & oz? Most of us can judge a weight in round lb's by holding it up, so ok say I had a fish that I reckoned weighed 8lb but no scales yet I report a fish of 7lb 14oz or 8lb 3oz either are a best guess yet a blatant lie (to me only) because I had no scales. Is the club saying that they would therefore have to accept what I claimed because I said I weighed them. What a bloody stupid rule if one is going to apply an honour system. Be honest and say this is what I think the fish weighed give or take a 8 or 10 oz. Or tell a blatant lie that I had scales aboard and make up a set of lb and oz? Realy someone please think about the logic of this. The two rays I caught were considerably larger than the large one on the clubs home page and I am happy that I caught them. If someone wants to be churlish and not write them up in a book that's up to them. This childish attitude about mines bigger than yours is probably the main thing that puts me off competitions. I wish I had not bothered Madder than usual Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
great white Posted June 11, 2007 Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 rGeat fish Mike and very worthy winners either would have been. Unfortunatly only weighed fish can be registered but a notable catch it must have tested your back mate. I think you should purchase some scales If you are out, all you have to do for the remaining comps is register that you are going out [ which you do anyway on the forum usually], fish within the rules ie max two rods or two hooks and record your catch [ which again you also do]. Fishing times are any 7 hr period between 0600 and 1800 so are very flexible No dig intended at anyone but,I find it hard to believe that we struggle at times to get 10 anglers fishing a comp when we know so many Members were afloat This weekend has proved from yours and Mikes catches that you do not need to have a fully kitted offshore angling boat or go dozens of miles to compete. you just have to be confident,enter, carry some scales and go for it Tight lines Charlie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul D Posted June 11, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 It is logical. If we were to accept guess weights of fish it would be meaningless as people are not very good at guessing weights. We have always had to have fish weighed and we still do have to have fish weighed and the "honour" system still makes sense as you are honestly weighing your fish. Are you seriously proposing we have all the members guessing their fish weights ? If so then propose it at a club meeting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
great white Posted June 11, 2007 Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 Mike I was typing while you entered your last post so it was not a reply However I would disagree about the weighing I have seen to many guessed weights miles out to accept that any of us would get even close to correct weights evey time While I have weighed enough eels to get Dans about right on sat, I would have put the bream at 4lb not 3lb 6 oz and the undulate at about 10 I have seen profesional skippers over 10 lbs out on eels and rays well out So I would not like to see the need to weigh fish taken out, except for sharks for teh sfaety of the angler and the fish The reason we fish on trust is so they can be weighed and returned Charlie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncan Posted June 11, 2007 Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 Realy someone please think about the logic of this. easy one Mike - lying or cheating is a deliberate act that you can't realistically regulate against (even weighing in doesn't prevent it) so you have to accept that if someone decides to do that there's nothing ultimately you can do. on the other hand an honest mistake about fish identification or reading a pair of scales accurately/fairly may happen to anyone - even faulty scales! However at least they tried and followed the required rules. Dave is about as experienced as anyone about estimateing fish weight - and whilst he is 95% right 95% of the time when he's wrong he can be miles out; conger and flats/rays being the hardest to estimate with huss/smoothies/spurs/tope close behind! if someone says they weighed it I believe them; if someone says it weighed 6lb I believe it probably did ... but if you want to register it weigh it. btw I realise you were simply letting us know what you caught in your first post - great - I'm responding to your specific 'challenge'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Afishionado Posted June 11, 2007 Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 Duncan I see your point but I still think that it (not you) is illogical However they were two clonking great fish and I am well pleased. Particulaly the Thornback which gave a fantastic fight stripping line of in huge ripping lunges several times. Certainly the best fight I have had from a fish for a long time. Mad Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maverick Martin Posted June 11, 2007 Report Share Posted June 11, 2007 Mike Those were obviously clonking fish and well done on your achievements. Re: the registering of fish. We as a club don't have many rules but for fairness what rules we have need to be adhered to. I believe we do need to weigh fish and if after weighing you say your fish was gazillion pounds then it will be accepted If guessing weights is to be adopted then I could over estimate the size of mine with you under estimating the size of yours which can exaggerate the outcome greatly and maybe embarrassing I accept that scales too can be out but at least we have half a chance of getting near to a proper weight with them The club IS run on trust but we do all need points of reference to ensure things run smoothly and fairly (most of the time ) The only other option would be to have a weigh in so all fish are weighed on the same scales but this would lead to loads of dead fish and would I feel be a step backwards which could also open us to criticism from the antis There are other options but it can then start to get messy and personally I am happy with the rule as is but the club belongs to members so every opinion counts Martin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swainiac Posted June 12, 2007 Report Share Posted June 12, 2007 All valid points above........but I would like to announce a far better catch that wasnt recorded. Mark, sat alongside the quay behind Weymouth Angling Club, on friday evening, inadvertantly left his wallet, alledgedly almost as fat as Paul D's, on the wall. Spotted by his young son, who obeying his dads requests all day to shut up, decided it best to keep schtuum, and not report the heinous mistake his father had made. Once indie the club, after consuming the first of many intended stella's, Mark reached into his pocket to remove his wallet.......which wasnt there. It was on the wall Dad...says Ryan. Expletives ensued.......and we eventually found a bobby to report the lost item. Cards cancelled, and well miffed...this led us to board Nipper, and sail off into the dark night, to seek out a conger and bully or two. Two days later, a kind member of the public calmly walks into a Lloyds bank in Birmingahm.....yes Birmingham, and hands in lost wallet, complete with the Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Afishionado Posted June 12, 2007 Report Share Posted June 12, 2007 Thanks for your reply's guys and in no way am I bitter about them not being recorded, I had a great time and that is the important thing after all. It's just that my trace of Mr Spocks Vulcan brain gags on the illogicality of the reasoning. Mad Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted June 12, 2007 Report Share Posted June 12, 2007 I had a great time and that is the important thing after all. Indeed it is, Comps are just a lottery after all PJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul D Posted June 12, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2007 Mike, Nice fish indeed - however, they have both been recorded as Thornbacks. I presume from your notes that the smaller one was an Undulate ? I am still sceptical that an accurate estimate can be made by lifting the fish. ( I know I couldn't perform such a feat - and that fact alone would mean weighing "by hand" is not feasible). Of interest - in the Utopia report on here there is a picture of my friend Steve holding an Undulate Ray - how heavy does everyone estimate this fish to be ? Another dilema which I would have, assuming your Rays - sic. Skate were accepted for prize giving purposes with estimated weights, would be that as standing the larger Thornback would actually be Fish of the Month, just beating Gnasher's 5lb 2oz Bream by a fraction. ( A fraction which is easily within the error of your estimate ). Happy to leave in the book as (est) weights, but I cannot put these forward for prizes, which is a shame, but those are the rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Afishionado Posted June 12, 2007 Report Share Posted June 12, 2007 Happy to leave in the book as (est) weights, but I cannot put these forward for prizes, which is a shame, but those are the rules. That sounds very fair Paul. Thank you I can live with that I got them muddled up, the Thornback was easily the larger. Today we bought the boat a digital camera and a set of digital scales. Mark my words not another bloody fish will cross our guwhales for the rest of this year!! By the way is it best to weigh a fish in the landing net and then deduct the weight of the net, or do you guys have special bags like carp anglers? Mad Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maverick Martin Posted June 12, 2007 Report Share Posted June 12, 2007 Mike weighing in the net and deducting the weight of the net after is the easiest way and kindest to the fish and exactly what we do on Awol. Smaller fish you can use a carrier bag Martin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncan Posted June 12, 2007 Report Share Posted June 12, 2007 there is little that won't fit in a bag for life plastic - tope and conger being exceptions. equally most rays convert them from 'bag for life' to 'shredded plastic with handles' quite quickly - but definitely fish friendly. worth a few p - and if you don't catch big fish use them to transport your table catch home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.