I've been watching After the Cast, as well as Ott Defoe and Edwin Evers channels on youtube. One of the things I've noticed them talking about is that they will not have success using livescope. Sometimes the fish either ignore their offering or they run from it.

 

They didn't say it specifically, but it makes me think that fish are getting wise to livescope. Anyone think that fish will ever get educated to it, and that it'll become less effective, essentially leveling the playing field again?

Sonar pinging has been an issue for decades and FFS is stronger pinging.

It comes down to how active the bass are and how pressured the fishery is.

I rarely use my sonar before fishing a spot known to hold big bass and check the area out while leaving to determine if the bass are there just not active.

I also use sonar when trying to locate bass and bait depth and caught lots of bass with the sonar on. It comes down to my feeling at the moment regarding the size of the bass and activity level. It’s good to know the bass are there!

Tom

People use it differently.   Now bass that are suspended over deep water might get wise to minnows shaking in front of them.  That’s just one way to use the technology.  Anglers will have to adjust if the fish get wise.  Ott and Edwin have never demonstrated much skill in using FFS so take what they say for what it’s worth.

There was a study done by someone I forget who maybe one of the youtube guys and basically it’s known that suspended fish will eat the jighead minnow a lot more frequently in cooler water as opposed to warm water. In warm water they will chase and follow it but sometimes it’s nearly impossible to get them to eat it, whereas in cold water they will aggressively eat it.. Now, the million dollar question is why is that the case? Is it that baitfish die and spiral to the bottom in cold water and the bass key in on that? Is it that their brains aren’t functioning in cold water and they simply react instead of analyzing anything? Nobody knows… 

I removed my livescope last year after seeing fish on bed scatter the second I pointed the transducer at them.  They would come back, didn’t care that I was around, turn the transducer towards them, boom, gone. I tried this on several beds I found that day, same result.

 

I always thought that livescope was a hindrance when fishing up close so I would turn the transducer off. After seeing what I seen last year, my thoughts were confirmed.

 

Still has its purpose obviously but it’s something to pay attention to so you know where to be selective. 

     I kinda look at it this way. There's dumb bass and smart bass.  The dumb bass will attack and eat anything it thinks might be food. It's just flat more aggressive.  The smart bass might never bite a artificial lure. It waits and when it is sure it is a meal of real fish and then it's attack instinct takes over and it eats.

    I have had the smart bass ( I think ) get fooled when I have made the perfect cast and it hit the bank or grazed the bottom of overhanging branches and then plopped gently into the water in the perfect spot and was instantly slammed.  Also I have had it happen when I have been frog fishing and made a bad cast or was getting wind blown past a dock or stump and had to burn my frog or lure past that hang up and got it past, stopped it after 5-10 ft. Again instant explosion that I am not ready for.  

    Now back on the subject. I've been using live scope for about three plus years.  Started with the 93SV and a LVS32 transducer.  Now I am using a 106 SV UHD2 and LVS34.  I am not expert with it.  But I do know that at times the fish will just flat swim away from your offering. Sometimes they just ignore it. Sometimes they'll follow it and then swerve away. Sometimes it takes repeated jerk's, snaps and dancing to get them to strike.  I still think it depends on the activity level of the bass and being able to trigger that "kill it/eat it" impulse to get that fish to commit to eating the lure.  

    Truly big smart bass IMHO are a lot harder to trigger to get that strike.

FM

Livescope belongs in the Livegarbage. 

 

Flip and punch as God intended.

 

Frogs are also OK.

Does sidescan, downview, and traditional sonor belong in the garbage too? what about gps? gps trolling motors? powerpoles? 250HP outboards? just asking… 

I turn off all electronics, even pull the trolling motor and pole in to where I’m hunting the big ones. 
Just like cyberdyne systems they’re learning.

In highly pressured waters they're getting conditioned to the minnow rolling for sure.

 

Every FFS master on the pro tours are extremely cognizant of boat positioning and maximizing distance from the fish. Can't say that has to do with the sonar pings, T-motor sound/prop, boat etc but likely a combination of all.

 

Bass do not have conscious thought but like every fish have extremely good raw instincts and are condition-able, meaning that fish of high genetic quality(most of the big ones) will get conditioned to pretty much anything. 

 

In regard to the show you mention, its notable that most guys that are particularly ineffective on the pro tours with FFS, despite nominally performing near identical techniques with similar lures, made their bones being excellent at implementing "blind" techniques were you aren't analyzing first hand a fishs reaction to a presentation(cranking, flipping heavy cover, dragging bottom, general power fishing). Their style of fishing is centered around quickly and effectively creating patterns and strategies without being able to see first hand how fish are reacting to a bait. 

Compare that to guys like Taku or Kyoya, who are FFS gurus despite getting on it mid/late way through their careers, but have always been sight fishing experts on highly pressured fish from coming up in Japan. Seth Feider mentioned in an interview he was fishing the exact same area as Kyoya in a derby that was absolutely loaded with fish, but he could not buy a bite, were as Kyoya would only make a cast every 10mins but always catch one. There are similar anecdotes from mediocre scopers about guys like Mckinney and Fothergill. 

 

 

9 hours ago, Bazoo said:

I've been watching After the Cast, as well as Ott Defoe and Edwin Evers channels on youtube. One of the things I've noticed them talking about is that they will not have success using livescope. Sometimes the fish either ignore their offering or they run from it.

 

They didn't say it specifically, but it makes me think that fish are getting wise to livescope. Anyone think that fish will ever get educated to it, and that it'll become less effective, essentially leveling the playing field again?

 

Pressure on fish is a known issue, whether you are beating the bank or fishing ledges.  Both of those things are long known areas to catch fish.  Shaking a minnow on livescope is a different set of fish that haven’t been targeted before like they have been the last 5 or so years.  So now that lots of people are doing it, the fish start feeling it.  

Not an expert with electronics but here is a thought.  I think the fish are aware of your presence even without any extra noise such as sonar pings, TM noise, etc.  It would be fun to know at what distance the fish move from "aware" to "alert" to "get the heck outa here".

It seems that FFS has proven that long casts catch more fish.  I don't have FFS but have made it part of the way I fish to keep as much distance as possible from where I think the fish are.  Never used to do that.

Before FFS fishermen had no idea how many bass they put their lures RIGHT in front of and were either ignored or spooked the fish. Now they do.  I don't feel that FFS has changed anything other than taking the "sporting" out of the sport because now you can find the fish with zero skill or human intelligence.  They still decide whether to bite or ignore you. 

14 hours ago, RHuff said:

Does sidescan, downview, and traditional sonor belong in the garbage too? what about gps? gps trolling motors? powerpoles? 250HP outboards? just asking… 

 

I mean I primarily bank fish, so yeah, all of it. 😂

This is one of the reasons I'm shaken a minnow less often - and going with small crank baits that get a pure reaction bite. Catch them off guard before they realize what's going on... 

3 hours ago, PGA Dropout said:

 

I mean I primarily bank fish, so yeah, all of it. 😂

 

 

 LOL Fair Enough 

6 hours ago, BigAngus752 said:

Before FFS fishermen had no idea how many bass they put their lures RIGHT in front of and were either ignored or spooked the fish. Now they do.  I don't feel that FFS has changed anything other than taking the "sporting" out of the sport because now you can find the fish with zero skill or human intelligence.  They still decide whether to bite or ignore you. 

 

 

 Not saying I totally disagree with you, but I do disagree with the zero skill or human intelligence part. 

 

 1. it takes human intelligence to design, install, and use FFS...  It's not like you turn on the screen and the fish are there... You still have to locate schools and fish and know what you're looking at... 2.  It still takes skill to rig and cast and make the right presentation to get fish to commit. Just because you see a bass on FFS doesn't mean you're going to catch it...  

 

I'd like to know what percentage of people on here have a firm stance against FFS that has never used it. If someone has used it, caught fish with it, decided it's not for them, and chooses not to use it then fair enough that's their decision and I respect that...   but it's hard to listen to people bash it and call it the devil to the sport when they have never even used it before.....  

8 minutes ago, RHuff said:

it's hard to listen to people bash it and call it the devil to the sport when they have never even used it before.....  

It’s also hard to listen to people say it’s cheating and requires no skill when half of the best pro anglers in the world are getting their butts kicked because they cannot figure out how to utilize it.

On 7/1/2025 at 4:39 PM, Craig P said:

I removed my livescope last year after seeing fish on bed scatter the second I pointed the transducer at them.  

I'm curious how close they were scattering? 

 

-------------

 

My experience so far is that livescope can go from amazing to maddening very quickly. At the moment my fish per cast is probably lower than just fishing traditionally. Between followers, rejectors, carp, gar, stuff on the bottom that looks like it might be a fish, missed casts (too long, too short, too left, boat in the wrong spot for the blob I happened to see, it's tough. I can't do it all day in the summer. Winter is a little different story for a bunch of reasons. Anyway it is just hard and needs a lot of skill that I don't have yet. Full attention every moment, constantly watching the intersection of wind/boat/fish movement etc. I get better every trip I hope, and part of that is knowing when to stop trying to target fish and just fish.

 

I do think it is consistently responsible for at least one top 5 of the day fish (and usually top 3) for me though. 

 

With all the complaining out of the way, using it like a 360 to see weed lines, cover, fish positioning etc is really amazing. I can tell pretty fast now if I'm somewhere likely to have fish and do it without driving over them. "Oh look there's a bunch of gills in this stretch, and blobs are setting up at the base of the weedline" is worth a lot vs "this spot looks good" 

 

59 minutes ago, txchaser said:

I'm curious how close they were scattering?

Within viewing distance with a good pair of polarized lenses. Say 30’?

 

With the rest of your post in mind, I had livescope for 4 years and felt it taught me everything I wanted to learn from it so with my earlier statement, I moved on as I felt it would deter learning more.  FWIW, I learned a TON!! using it.  It taught me everything that I was seeing on sidescan and downscan. Kind of odd but when I look at side and down imaging now, my brain sees it in 3D. Without livescope, that would not be possible.  I also learned a ton about fish behavior. Seeing on screen what a jerk or pause could do to a fish blew my mind and I now use those methods every cast. 

 

I would not suggest not using livescope, it is a great learning tool.

28 minutes ago, Craig P said:

Within viewing distance with a good pair of polarized lenses. Say 30’?

 

With the rest of your post in mind, I had livescope for 4 years and felt it taught me everything I wanted to learn from it so with my earlier statement, I moved on as I felt it would deter learning more.  FWIW, I learned a TON!! using it.  It taught me everything that I was seeing on sidescan and downscan. Kind of odd but when I look at side and down imaging now, my brain sees it in 3D. Without livescope, that would not be possible.  I also learned a ton about fish behavior. Seeing on screen what a jerk or pause could do to a fish blew my mind and I now use those methods every cast. 

 

I would not suggest not using livescope, it is a great learning tool.

That's some good info right there. I don't think I'd like fishing that way, but I do think I'd love learning about fish that way.

I've heard elite level scopers talk about fish running from FFS pings in California and coming towards FFS pings in Texas. Seems like it just depends on the individual fishery. I'd think clear water and more pressure would be associated with a negative reaction.

 

On 7/1/2025 at 4:04 PM, RHuff said:

There was a study done by someone I forget who maybe one of the youtube guys and basically it’s known that suspended fish will eat the jighead minnow a lot more frequently in cooler water as opposed to warm water. In warm water they will chase and follow it but sometimes it’s nearly impossible to get them to eat it, whereas in cold water they will aggressively eat it.. Now, the million dollar question is why is that the case? Is it that baitfish die and spiral to the bottom in cold water and the bass key in on that? Is it that their brains aren’t functioning in cold water and they simply react instead of analyzing anything? Nobody knows… 

I think that's all about fishing pressure. A lot fewer guys on the water in the winter means a lot fewer baits in fish's faces. We used to say A Rigs only worked in cold water- we know now that's absolutely not true. 

On 7/1/2025 at 6:50 PM, PGA Dropout said:

Livescope belongs in the Livegarbage. 

 

Flip and punch as God intended.

 

Frogs are also OK.

Amen, This is the way 

I have lived through every sonar advance since the they were introduced for public use in the 60’s. The reaction to every advancement has been universally negative. It’s hard to imagine Minnesota banning flashers today but they did! 
When I transported my Lowrance paper graph to Canada I hid in a tackle front drawer box! My in-laws thought it was cheating in the 70’s!

Get over your bias technology never stops!

Tom

I didn't know that Tom, thanks for sharing.

Well @WRB-2.0 we can agree to disagree.  I've lived through all of those technologies, including electrofishing.  But I doubt you'd champion electrofishing as a fair and sportsmanlike technology in the hands of anglers.  

 

Like electrofishing, I feel FFS is a fantastic tool in the hands of biologists.  There's so much that can be learned through both, but each can be equally destructive in the hands of the public.