Simply put....

 

In your experience, have you found that baits with the most realistic profiles/paintjobs/ etc. catch fish any better/bigger/more frequently, than baits that lack any level of realism in their design? 

 

 

So far its been my experience that says, No.  Ive come to figure that the fish typically know the difference between something like a fake craw, and a real craw.  But the fish seem more likely to strike at baits that have more ambiguity to them, and will for instance, go for a bait that (for lack of a better term) creates the illusion of say, a craw. 

 

What say you? 

I say, spinnerbaits!

You're buying confidence. That said, I use lucky craft and mega bass Jerkbaits in clear water, because that's the only time I can think of where a bass has the chance to stare down a bait.

I think bass are predators. They will strike anything then perceive as edible. That said I believe that a rage craw on a shakeyhead is life like enough to get them to strike it. Remember they have no way to feel it other than putting it in their mouth. And as predators they will eat something even if they aren't hungry just to prevent another fish from getting it.

I have a 75 gallon fish tank at home with African cichlids in it and it is fun to feed them guppies or small crickets. On occation I put in some bright red plastic crickets in that I use for crappies. They will eat it and spit it out 3-5 times before they give up.

I snorkled in a clear river and fed bass live crawfish then tried to catch them with a plastic crawfish on a hook and short piece of light line. They knew the difference and would not bite . Personally, and I may be wrong , I think they see the string.  I know I can see it and they see much better in the water than I .I can see fluorocarbon under water easily too. 

I do believe realistic lures can be a great thing. Just look at all the guys catching massive bags of bass on realsitc swimbaits.

I snorkled in a clear river and fed bass live crawfish then tried to catch them with a plastic crawfish on a hook and short piece of light line. They knew the difference and would not bite . Personally, and I may be wrong , I think they see the string.  I know I can see it and they see much better in the water than I .I can see fluorocarbon under water easily too. 

Im getting the impression, that when a fish has the chance to sit there and get a good look at the bait...the more realism that the bait is designed with, then the easier it is for the fish to tell that it is fake. 

I do believe realistic lures can be a great thing. Just look at all the guys catching massive bags of bass on realsitc swimbaits.

True, but Im wondering if the fish are keying more so on the swimbait's movement, rather than its actual details. 

 

But on the flip side - look at all the guys catching massive bags of bass on Jig n Pigs.   Perhaps, different waters, different circumstances.

I say, spinnerbaits!

AYE!!!

True, but Im wondering if the fish are keying more so on the swimbait's movement, rather than its actual details.

But on the flip side - look at all the guys catching massive bags of bass on Jig n Pigs. Perhaps, different waters, different circumstances.

Do realistic lures work well? Absolutely. Do "not realistic" lures work well? Absolutely.

Do realistic lures work well? Absolutely. Do "not realistic" lures work well? Absolutely.

But does one work, any better or less, than the other? 

Im getting the impression, that when a fish has the chance to sit there and get a good look at the bait...the more realism that the bait is designed with, then the easier it is for the fish to tell that it is fake. 

I agree 100 percent. The 70's and 80's were much better times to catch fish on a plastic worm than todays educated fish. 

I agree 100 percent. The 70's and 80's were much better times to catch fish on a plastic worm than todays educated fish. 

True, and honestly, the way people perceive things is really not much different.   For isntance, we can easily tell that a mannequin is fake, more so than a simple human silhouette.  Despite the more accurate details on the mannequin(under certain conditions).  

I think that once you get a not so realistic pattern with some realistic colors in the water moving/wobbling they almost blend into something realistic. More times than not, I think bass strike because the bait is moving, which they register as alive and therefore food.

True, and honestly, the way people perceive things is really not much different.   For isntance, we can easily tell that a mannequin is fake, more so than a simple human silhouette.  Despite the more accurate details on the mannequin(under certain conditions).  

...and if you see the mannequin in low light situations it can be impossible to tell. 

I snorkled in a clear river and fed bass live crawfish then tried to catch them with a plastic crawfish on a hook and short piece of light line. They knew the difference and would not bite . Personally, and I may be wrong , I think they see the string.  I know I can see it and they see much better in the water than I .I can see fluorocarbon under water easily too. 

 

So you think the string was the difference? Did try using the live crawfish on the same hook and short piece of light line?

...and if you see the mannequin in low light situations it can be impossible to tell. 

Agreed...

 

(and now we come back to those "certain conditions")

 

In that instance, the low light has begun to add some level of ambiguity to that mannequin.  (which seems to be ideal)  Under those same conditions the silhouette is already playing mind tricks on you.  

So you think the string was the difference? Did try using the live crawfish on the same hook and short piece of light line?

Good point . No I didnt and I think if I did the bass would have took it . I think line is part of the equation still.

On the flip side to all of this, it does also seem (and Im sure weve all heard this before) that when baits are larger (to a certain extent) the fish are even more apt to tell that it is fake.  Hence, more added realism almost becomes required for a bait of such size. 

 

Maybe..I dont know.

But does one work, any better or less, than the other?

If one always out fished the other then all the pro's would be using one or the other.

Simply put....

 

In your experience, have you found that baits with the most realistic profiles/paintjobs/ etc. catch fish any better/bigger/more frequently, than baits that lack any level of realism in their design? 

 

 

So far its been my experience that says, No.  Ive come to figure that the fish typically know the difference between something like a fake craw, and a real craw.  But the fish seem more likely to strike at baits that have more ambiguity to them, and will for instance, go for a bait that (for lack of a better term) creates the illusion of say, a craw. 

 

What say you?

I say no.

If one always out fished the other then all the pro's would be using one or the other.

Ok, I'll take that as a "No." 

So now let me mix it up with this....

 

I spoke earlier if "certain" conditions.  So with that, are there any conditions, to your knowledge, that would make a bait of high realism, more productive than a bait without? 

Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't, but to the point about a plastic worm having a greater advantage in the 70's & 80's, but due to a largemouths exceedingly great ability to have become educated in this century I find to be a fairly inaccurate statement. In fact, ridiculous. The plastic worm has been & still is my favorite, most dependable Lure I have ever used. I use these plastic worms because they work.. Just as good now as they did in 1978 when I began to use them.

Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't, but to the point about a plastic worm having a greater advantage in the 70's & 80's, but due to a largemouths exceedingly great ability to have become educated in this century I find to be a fairly inaccurate statement. In fact, ridiculous. The plastic worm has been & still is my favorite, most dependable Lure I have ever used. I use these plastic worms because they work.. Just as good now as they did in 1978 when I began to use them.

Ive used them since about 78 also. We obviously have different experience. I still have a texas rig tied on 100 percent of the time but I catch a fraction of the fish with them as I use too. But this is off subject. Would make a good thread though.