Team9nine

This and This ^^^ The debate has been going on in bass fishing circles now for around 40 years. Don't think we are any closer to definitively answering the question any time soon. Natural lure coloration and design has come and gone over the years. Seems like we're back in a phase where it's "hot" again from an anglers perspective. Don't forget that the late great lure designer Tom Seward developed a line of crankbaits (in the late 80s, I believe) with countershading, specifically trying to flip mother nature and make his realistic shaped lures actually stand out and not be able to blend in and camouflage. As Tom pointed out with the Bagley super naturals, where did Tom's countershading idea go? "Bye-bye" with the rest of the great ideas and lures over the years supporting both sides of the argument. I think at present, the best argument for super natural stuff right now is in the area of trophy bass fishing, especially swimbaiting, where the attempt at providing as few unnatural cues as possible to the largest and most experienced bass on the planet might have merit. Beyond that, life goes on, and color/pattern is just one variable among many to consider on any given day. Some days it might matter. Most days it probably doesn't mean much.

Yes While I was fishing tourneys (for over 25 years), it was always the latter because of efficiency. Since I stopped about a decade ago, it now much more resembles the former.

Would depend on how you like to fish. If most of your time is fishing shallow enough water where you can plant the pole and work an area thoroughly, it would be the better option. On the other hand, if most of your fishing is done offshore where you are holding the boat in deeper water (>8'-10'), or on rivers, then the bigger troll motor with spotlock would get the nod in my book.

So far, I've been wholly unimpressed the times I've thrown the bait, both the 90 and the 110. A handful of fish at best and a pretty poor hookup ratio when I have gotten bites. Maybe I've been unfortunate to throw it only in places, or at times, where it doesn't work well. Bought a few to try and so far have left most unopened on the shelf because of the poor showing. ...And please don't take offense, as this is directed in response to the bolded statement in general, and obviously not you since you read it somewhere else, but I'm filing that one under "load of crap" wherever it came from

Don't think they're dead, but I haven't carried a single one in the boat for at least a decade, or even thrown one in that time. May have to go buy one this year

Looks like the old Arkie weedless standups. Had that unique 90 degree bend in the wire guard. Could buy them in Wal-Mart and other places. Haven't looked to see if they're still around, but lots of similar ones on the market now days.

Catching a few in between crappie trips. Will get a bit more serious with them once winter is over. Things look like we'll freeze up around here mid to late next week. But, it's already January, so it won't be a long wait

Taking tournament casting out of the equation and just doing normal everyday casting, braid casts farther on spinning; sometimes much further. Since I almost never use braid on baitcasters, I can't say for sure there. Other factors come into play like revolving spools/bearings and such, so my guess is that things would be much closer in general because it's not just line and a lure involved.

FF was started in 1963 by Bill Binkelman as a way to promote and sell Spoonplugs. George Pazik was brought on a few years later, ultimately taking control in 1970 and the official name changed to Fishing Facts. Things stayed that way until the mid to late 90s when Pazik sold the magazine. Spence Petros and Carl Malz were let go, and everything changed. Never was the same again after that. It was recently resold again. Lunkers Love Nightcrawlers was a more modern and updated version of Bill's original live bait books. It had a lot of info contributed by the new editors as well as a bunch of Buck Perry Structure stuff. Believe it was updated and revised/republished at least once.

This ^^ You may not realize it at first if you don't have a faster reel with higher IPT to compare to, but it makes a big difference. See what IPT is for that particular model; probably low to mid 20s. Will it work - yes. Will it be ideal - no.

Around here, I think the baby BH is more popular than the regular. Fish however you like. It's even good on a C-rig. On the Finesse side of things, we fish the tiny BH on a mushroom head jig in spring a lot.

As I thought, I got my first bass of 2019 today, and it was small We got around an inch of rain, so it really stained up the water around here and hurt the bite. That said, I did finally find a few others that were a little bigger, though I lost what I think was the best fish of the day...happens.

Go to YouTube and track down and watch @Paul Roberts videos. Lots of great info and underwater video of what goes on in the life of a bass pond.

My last bass of the year was Friday, and would be very lucky to be considered "scorable" under MLF rules With any luck, my first bass of 2019 will be tomorrow, and I'd be surprised if it turns out to be any larger than the last...but it's that hope and anticipation that it could be a big one on any given cast that keeps us coming back day after day ?

They were - Chuck Wood designed the Beetle and Beetle spin (and the Puddle Jumper) and is considered the grandfather of Midwest finesse.

Doubt it, but you never know. If you took pictures of all the fish, you can usually compare them and tell, looking for little similarities in coloration, fin shape, markings, etc.

Exactly - not the same as now. The only change I made to the old ones was to put a matching Sampo bearing on in place of the crane swivel. Made for a great late winter/early spring spinner.

Not to be a stickler or anything, but the package says it's a 1/4 oz I get your point though. The 3" used to be a very common size available in multiple weights and colors many, many years ago, then they really pared down their selection. I used it a lot in the spring as a finesse type spinnerbait and did well on it. Good to see they are bringing it back to a degree, though I'm convinced they changed the original mold some, and have certainly limited color and blade options in the newer lineup.

Hear, hear! This is why I could never be a professional angler...when the contract says I have to do video promoting all their company products - I just couldn't do it even if I'm getting paid

Yes, any other brand of line out there...except maybe Vanish Depends what you are wanting to try. You could go straight fluoro with something easily managed like InivisX, or something more similar to what you were using like Yozuri Hybrid, or a copolymer like McCoys ("Mean Green"). All would be fine for what you are doing. Sure you'll get a lot of other suggestions...

Yep ? some people refer to it as honeycombs. Bluegill tend to do it for protection with the biggest gills toward the center of the nests and the smaller males on the outskirts.

Bluegill - bass aren't colonial nesters, and neither are catfish...and shad/shiners are broadcast spawners (no beds).

Contribute to our "Palomar Knot break or Knot slip - Seaguar Blue Line Flouro Leader" discussion. It might go on all winter

I'm guessing typo in their data set. No doubt the line tests somewhat above its rated strength, but you're not getting 30% greater line strength than rated with a knot tied in your fluoro. That flies in the face of about every other piece of data you can find in this regard...and I've seen a bunch of it. If instead that was 20# or even 17# fluoro they tested on (instead of 15#), then I say, 'OK, plausible." Just a quick browse of the extensive data Tackle Tour has amassed with fluoro knots, tensile strengths and so many lines tested should tell you something is wrong. That said, I did see where the Berkley braid knot beat the FnF knot in their final showdown, whatever year that was

All depends on whose data you want to believe According to this chart, F&F is slightly worse than Palomar with braid and fluoro. Both average nearly identical. EDIT: Actually, looking at all the data points in your chart where they are claiming that the majority of the knots tested with 15# fluorocarbon broke higher than the rated test line with the knots tied in them, I'd say is highly questionable at best...and the data points showing near 20# break strength are borderline bogus. Something isn't right with that data set.