Paul Roberts

Blades are great lures. In warm water summer/fall I liked them for "bombing" humps -throwing onto a hump from a distance and ripping it up and letting it fall -takes are on the fall. In cold water, it's the same deal but you're fishing closer to vertical, with shorter lifts -just enough to get the thing to flutter. Takes are on the fall. Being in FL, at your water temps you'll probably want to experiment within that range. More horizontal and faster covers more water. Oh yeah, they can be tough to fish around cover -weeds/junk will glom on, wood won't leggo. Weeds are a little bit less an issue in warmer water bc aggressive rips can clear them.

Don't encourage me! Then again my wife always complains I'm tough to buy for.

I have one as you describe. I bought it new about 1985. Good rod.

For what I mostly do -places I could stay happy: -MH spinning rod (8-15lb) -Wide-spool reel -20#braid w/various leader materials:

Too many people don't know what's trouble, until they're in it. You've done your homework, and then some. No surprise there. I made my comment from experience -being both an adventurous die-hard, and a (lucky) fool a few of those times.

Very cool Wayne. Thanks for the update. Nice contours there. If you find any big girls there it would be fun to see a pic or two -just to complete the picture. 8-) I see you have your new SS up and running. I want one too. But I think I might feel too silly putting one on a float tube lol. Actually, no I wouldn't. But another grand into my float tube would be tough to justify to my wife.

Just fishing, over time, finds me some good areas. But a couple days with sonar can add more areas, and key spots within those areas than I could collect in a year or two by casting alone. All ponds are different though -some the bass are mostly shoreline related, others have good away from shore areas. Never know what you might find. And good spots can be mighty small.

Don't laugh too hard. They have a chase boat. And are in tropical waters.

Hey...Careful... You might fall through!

Sorry to hear your troubles. Sounds like you'll have to wait a few days. Me...I gotta wait a couple months. Others are bound to pipe in that they won't be (open water) fishing 'till May. It's been below 0F the last week here. This week, it MIGHT hit the freezing mark. I'm psyched!

A buddy and I once launched a 9ft (cheap) inflatable off Bear Ck. It made for a good story -which is somewhere in the BR universe. You be careful if you try that. You never know what you might hook. Did you know radio telemetered chinooks have been known to make an almost non-stop beeline from NY to ONT?

I agree with Brian's thinking. However, I've used them and liked them. They are a fairly light (but well-tempered) wire so, with the oblique angle of the point I'd not use them with very heavy line, or where you have really big fish. Where I fish, for 1 to 4+lb bass I tend to catch, on 10lbXT, they work fine. As to hooking, they seem to do so just fine. I haven't tried it but some good anglers actually open the points of their trebles a bit when they are receiving lots of bite type strikes. Maybe the offset on a rotating acts similarly? They do hold really well -too well with barbs. But I mash barbs down on cranks anyway -works fine, and is SO easy to slip hooks out. If anyone does decide to try some, the ones sold through BPS are not like the one's that come stock. The BPS ones appear to be of poorer quality.

I've got a bunch of Matzuo Huntin Dogs. They are inexpensive, with nice finishes, good size (3-1/2") for northern bass I fish, BUT... be forewarned, they vary in quality. Some sit with the tail straight down. So...I've drilled 'em, replaced the big bearing near the tail, and re-sealed them. They still cast well enough (on spinning tackle) but can be paused without looking silly. For all the Huntin' Dawgs I have, and the work I have into them, a couple Sammy's would've saved me the headache.

Very nice!

First of all, I can understand where J Francho's apparent annoyance is coming from (sort of), in that structure is rarely of great import in small ponds, only because, as roadwarrior points out, bass will often make use of an entire pond. Unlike a big lake, much of a given pond is all bass habitat. But, I do map the small waters I fish. In fishing, the devil's in the details and I don't always remember things as I jump around between waters over the years. It really helps to keep a journal and maps. I fish ponds from 2 to 40 acres, from shore and from a float tube. I do map them, even the small ones; partly for fun and sometimes out of necessity. The larger ones (with plenty of water I can't reach from shore) are where mapping unseen structure matters most of course -and I rely on sonar for much of this. Most of the smaller ones I can cover pretty well visually and by casting. But I'll use whatever is at my disposal and makes sense to map my small waters: satellite imagery, sonar, visual, and casting. I use a digital voice recorder to keep detailed notes, although a pen and pocket notebook are good for quick sketches as often times it's easier to sketch than describe shoreline objects that line up and mark unseen structure. Some Details: I get depth readings both by sonar (compact LCD by float tube, rod-mounted wireless Humminbird from shore), and/or a metered anchor line mounted on my float tube and marked every foot (black) and 5ft (red). Plumbing though is slow going, but does accomplish accurate depth readings, bottom makeup (and temperature profiles) of discrete areas. It's not very efficient for finding unseen structure/cover. Bottom dragging jigs or a C-rig can be helpful but is also slow and in my weedier waters not often the best, or at least fastest, approach. With most lures I simply want to know what's there first then I start probing with lures to understand details. This last is critical of course, but first you want to be close to something interesting. I now check all ponds I fish with satellite imagery. I do this, at very least, to get the correct shape of the ponds as I map them in my journals. I check a number of imagery sources because areas may be shot at different times. I look for the ones that show the pond on a sunny day with no ice cover and no wind. It's amazing what you may see. I've located sunken humps I would have had to stumble on when fishing that have yielded good fishing options. They are now mapped and I can go straight to em and drop buoys, or start casting. I make good use of brilliantly sunny days, walking or floating ponds, peering in and noting things. Several times, on different ponds, I've floated over sunken humps, boulder piles, or downed trees out away from shorelines. One sunny day, I floated over a small hump and spied a pot-bellied lunker LM holding on its edge. Some of these offshore shallows I find as the season progresses, when growing aquatic vegetation reveals them. In other waters, they may be hidden. Since water levels may vary on some waters, I'll be sure to get out there at low water and see what's there. Here's a bay on a mid-sized pond that I checked out during a serious drought. At bank-full level this area looks like a flat. I always passed it up, or just sight fished it in spring. I never knew those channels were there. They hold small bass most of the year, but in late winter/early spring they can hold a bunch of mature pre-spawners. I've never seen anyone else fish them. In another small pond at low water, I found THE wintering hole for the majority of mature bass in the pond. I later also found it, and another, in one very nice satellite image. There's one small res that JFrancho might have fished (we share waters, but 20-30 years apart) that has two great sunken humps that you cannot see, but can reach, from shore. One gave up a bunch of 12-14 crappies, a 30 northern, and a 19inch brown trout of all things (those last two are a hint J ) The other gave up a 5+ and a 6lb LM (the 6 was caught by my buddy). These are the largest of each species that I caught in those ponds over several years -all from two discrete areas. I would guess, knowing that particular water, that these areas are still being used by mature fish. Finally, I map found locations by orienting them with shoreline objects, and then I keep hand drawn maps of my ponds in my journals. Each time I fish them, I add more detail and observations. I review them before I fish because I just won't remember the details. Oh yeswhile I'm at itMy sonar does have GPS, but it just isn't useful on the size waters I fish, as I can easily line up shoreline objects and get close enough to easily re-find unseen things by sonar, and then drop my buoys.

So...what do you all think? What would be the key properties would you like to see in line technology?

Great articles! I love this kind of thing -well documented material. Gives me a deeper understanding of my fishing waters. I have a pond with both LM and SM. At present the smallies dominate -at least my catches. There are good numbers of big smallies (to 20"), but of the smalls I catch, most are LM. These articles address the probable reasons for this. I'm wondering how long they've been together and when/if a dominance shift will occur.

Fishing is too complex for there to be one way to catch 'em. Buck Perry said, repeatedly, (paraprased): "If you are relying on some secret twitch (in your lure) to carry you, you are sadly mistaken, and will wind up disappointed." This idea is certainly not news to the pros. There's no reason not to share -unless you happen to be working on something particular that is sensitive in timing or location. And that's understandable.

One more, before I get back to work lol: Contact works! We read about it all the time. But so does a free-running plug a lot of the time. As Chris mentions, you've got to ID fish position, then get your plug to them. If you don't understand dive curves (with the rig in your hands), you'll most likely be out of position and not catching. Cranking can be considered difficult because it does require some understanding to get the needed precision -something cranks CAN offer. It's not just a chuck-n-wind game, esp when you are throwing to stuff you can't see. Often away from shore fish can be all over a free-running plug -then things slow down. At that point contact can draw a few more. Other times, when fish aren't highly aroused on their own, contact is necessary.

OK...since we're back on topic: Good stuff. I like plates too. Except under really high vis conditions in shallow water, chrome can be too much of a good thing. That's where the clear/translucent finishes come in. One thing I disagree with is that plated finishes "flash" underwater. They only do so in shallows or VERY clear water in the depths. Water has the effect on light of scattering it. This diffuses flash to the point that flash cannot exist too deep, or even in shallow water with some color -with either dissolved, or especially, suspended material. Ralph Manns (accomplished angler, researcher and diver) has said that at a certain depth, chrome becomes black. (This can be good actually in some circumstances -as Chris alludes). So...plated finishes may be at their best in clearer water, or shallower waters. Get some color to the water, and I like opaque colors -dark, whites, or chartreuse (hate it but man it catches fish).

Very well put, Catt. I think a lot of such griping is sour grapes. But I understand at least some of the reasons for that feeling. When you are thirsting for knowledge, and a then you read something from a pro that is obviously coming from the selling side of his persona -it can tick you off. Problem for the pro is, they only get so much air time, and that is usually sponsored time. The companies make darn sure the air/ad time they pay for is covered. After this, the pro is 'free' to talk turkey. But few of us get that time with a pro. Not being on Toledo Bend or other big name waters, I won't be running into big name pros in the parking lot. So a lot of what I read from top pros does sound like, and often is, advertising. So, I can understand angler's frustrations. But there are good pieces out there -like that interview with Paul Elias. I also know he's not covering all the bases -writing a book before our very eyes! He's offering insights and A LOT of what we get out of such stuff comes from what we bring to it. In education circles it's called "transfer" -the knowledge and experience we have allows us access others won't have -the ability to read between the lines of what's being offered. I find that the more I learn, the more I get out of a good piece of writing. I just don't read something once. I'll re-read good material a year later and get knew insights I'd overlooked before. There's good stuff out there. But nobody is going to teach you to fish by talking at you. Fishing is a DIY kinda thing. Thus, I CAN see how frustrating it could be for a novice to feel roped in to the advertising, which, in many parts of the fishing world is the last bastion of the "snake oil salesman". Read the descriptions of lures in the catalogs -it's enough to turn my stomach.

That's a VERY nice looking jig. Love the fox fur in there. I tie my own too.

Well I can't talk about the suspending version, but can about the floating Long A. It has a wide rolling action -very different from say the original floating Rap. The X-Rap is closer but I think less wide. There seem to be 2 basic actions that are talked about with jerks: the faster ripping (for warmer water) exemplified by the X-Rap, and and the rolling twitch used in colder water, exemplified by the Rogue. My guess is the Long A could provide a good rolling twitch. It's a stable running plug though -don't know how well it would scoot to one side like an X-Rap does when given a loose leash. That's the X-Rap's key feature, as well as being about the most weedless minnow plug I've seen. Again, I haven't tried the suspender so... try it and let us know.

Well I was avoiding this post since it went askew. I do want to say, in defense of "pros", that they only have to hide certain things, for good reason I think. Just like I will bend over backwards to help anglers, but not share a particular thing or location I might feel is sensitive at that time. There is SO much going on out there in the bass' world and so many ways to win a tournament or have a great day, I can't imagine pros -when not on a particular tournament bite -won't try to help anglers, or will try to mislead them. It must also be understood that pros need to sell product -they are part of the tackle industry. I worked at a large tackle shop and took on that role, as part "expert advice" and part salesman. The conflict of interest is obvious and you need skill and the best intentions for anglers you meet in that context. But still lots of people are offended and dis-trusting right off the bat. Some WANT to put you down as trying to mislead. As to this thread, style weighed in heavy, and the info got lost. It became personal. The discussion could have been about the details of crankbait fishing. And if you disagree or have a question, you can speak up -on topic. Didn't see anything information-wise that Chris presented that was at issue. Nothing popped out I felt like I needed to challenge, question. Certainly nothing that would lead anyone astray. Discussion? Absolutely! There's always room for that.

Yes, that was it. Line diameter affects presentation greatly and is one of the things that novices often tend to overlook. When I see lures that require a light line tied to rope -and "rope" could be 8lb line in some circumstances -I cringe. It's not that they are lazy, but that they don't know, or have been unwilling to put the bucks into the range of rigs one needs to cover many bases. When I buy a new spinning reel, I buy 3 or 4 extra spools right off the bat -it's part of the purchase. My spools now contain braid for shallows, and FC for the depths. And I'm still experimenting. At one time "mono" was virtually all we had. I've thought for a long time that the biggest breakthroughs in tackle technology will come in the form of lines -and it appears to be happening. Can't wait to see what's coming! One more thing to add about potential sensitivity in lines: Rigidity. This makes line a bear to cast, but conversely should affect the ability of line to transmit vibrations. Braid is so sensitive bc it has no stretch to absorb vibrations. But it loses sensitivity -completely -with any slack. This leads me to believe that stiffer lines, like FCs, should be more sensitive due to their rigidity. I distinctly remember fishing with a new rod and line combo I had years ago mid 80s. It was when IM6 appeared I believe. The rod was a Berkley Bionix and felt like a blade of straw in my hand. It was so sensitive coupled with XT (then the formula was stiffer low stretch now some shock absorption has been added), or with a Stren co-filament available then, with a polyester core. It actually shocked me to feel takes on plastics with a good bow hanging from the rod tip. Tap! Very cool, esp when fishing plastics and jigs on a nearly slack line. So, I'm waiting for the next generation of line. My wish list is: -Minute diameter -Density to sink -No stretch -Rigidity for vibration transmission. (It will be SOOOO thin that it will handle beautifully on spinning reels of course lol). SO, you engineers out there get busy. I'm sure they already are.