best chance too

[TOP SECRET]

Rod,

Could be very true about fishing other pro-ams... all I know is catching 6 fish in 10ft waves is tough! I think everyone knows my true opinion on the 6 vs 9, but I'll state it again just to be redundant redundant....

I hate how the Sodus ProAm has become a brown fishing tournament. This year I was phsyched to be hitting kings so well up until the first day of the proam... then the wind blew and the bite shut down. If we hadn't lost a couple of key fish the first day we would have been in first with only 7 fish, but day 2 fishing for kings was near impossible without a bigger boat (kings were out in the 200-300fow range where the waves were ungodly). I know people will say that fishing for browns on days like that is more strategic and while I don't disagree I still don't like

I would like to see a tourney where it's biggest 6 with culling allowed. One that seperates pros from ams. Out of Sodus. With a low price tag for ams (~$200) And I nominate Rod to start it lol.

Nick

[Time Out]

Nick,

Remember the 9 fish salmon boxes last year in Sodus? Its all strategy. We didn't fish for browns last year at all and in two tourneys this year we did. Can't catch them if there not there.

[A-TOM-MIK]

6 fish or 9 fish

18" or 23"

Lakers or no Lakers

1 Atlantic etc etc

Kings or BT's

Strategy yes !!!!

Do you all recall the 2008 Niagara Pro/Am when most boats were done fishing well short of the allotted time frame with their limit, out of 2 tourney days I recall around 20 pro limits/day in the Pro's alone>?

Threads ensued for months after most anglers wanted the size limit increased

The following Spring not the case

Some boats adapted or learned after the fact, that targeting larger fish was the way to go, this vs. complaining about implementing new rules to suit individual cases

The current rules set in place seem to be good ones concerning no cull, time frames to fish in, amount of fish and sizes, we all can dicker all day long about personal wishes and gain no ground at all.

One great thing is we have several types of tourney's to fish on LO, if your willing to cross borders you can possibly fish over a dozen tourney's a season, this with as many as a half dozen types of events with different formats.

The rules that need "a good hard look" with an open mind are the ones where it seems "almost everyone" wants them.

Simple food for thought, if you don't like the rules in one event try another one, as there are actually quite a lot to try

Tom

[Chasin Tail]

I was on another board today and saw they started an online petition to ban a certain team from competing in MI tournaments. So, I was thinking why can't we start a petition for those who would like to see the Pro-Am's go back to closed Comm.????? There it is a simple way to show how many people don't want Open Comm.

[Yankee Troller]

Andy,

Aren't you turning into quite the internet rat! Told you full time jobs are boring!

[TOP SECRET]

Told you full time jobs are boring!

Amen! It's getting harder and harder to find the time to get on here and bicker with you guys

Nick

[Capt Vince Pierleoni]

Shade, I will give it a shot answering your questions: The Pro-Am got started here in 1985. It was being successfully run in Michigan, out of Ludington, for several years prior. It was with great assistance by the wonderful(then) Lowrance Electronics co. They were truly based out of Tulsa OK at the time, and honchos from the company were all over it. I remember a John Florio being instrumental in the operation. He moved on to start the Cabelas Walleye circuit. Don't know where he is now. They ran them with intensity, we fished one in MI where a team was DQed for waving to another team--under the no comm rule. We watched another team and observer sort through their cooler, sorting out fish that would count and not count. They had ran so far away, they did not know the day had been weather shortened. The times and weights on their sheets were critical. Lowrance put sponsorship money up(as well as units), earned naming rights, and was considered the most prestigious event on both lakes. The "Brand recognition" they recieved from those early events continues today. Only until recently, many still referred to it as the "Lowrance tournament". I am looking forward to another company that wants to etch their name into history and the minds of the buying public, to step up and earn naming rights and run with the Pro-Am series. Perhaps the efforts with the TV shows will lead to this. I personally feel that the point scoring system, which came from those Lowrance people, is a stroke of genius. SO many times, strategy must be considered while weighing out numbers vs size. Many events where trout and Salmon were both available but not exactly in the same locations, have come down to mere single points to determine the winner. Good stuff. I do enjoy the Salmon only events, but the Pro -Ams and when they are held pose tremendous challenges.

Today, due to the growing interest in these exhilarating events, we have 4. I'm sure the economic shot-in-the-arm they provide where ever they are held, is another reason why an area would want to host one. The series concept is fantastic, needs to grow, and I'm sure is in it's infantcy.

As for who owns them, wow, I guess the counties that they are run out of??? Wish I could say we do. I just know improvement is easier from within, whether participating or sponsoring. I think the commitees that are in place today, are there because when the economy first started to slide, manufacturers did not want to spend man power policing and organizing these events. They hoped to continue name recognition through sponsorship money or product only. Tourism people(some begrudgingly) and a few business owners stepped up and picked up the slack. Most of us have something rule-wise we would like to see changed, but running these events is a HUGE undertaking. I think some of the way rules are conducted, are to minimize ugly "gray areas", and keep the counties from becoming involved in controversy. At the same time, the integrity of the events is of the utmost importance. Perhaps it is possible for us as participants through peer pressure to police ourselves above and beyond what the commitees are willing to do. This could work until another corporate sponsor with a backbone and a concern for ethics and integrity picks the series up and runs with it.

As for online petitions, these should not be necessary if the event or series organizers conduct their own due dilligence. Have the spine to ban for life anyone flagrantly cheating. In the defense of the Pro-Am commitee, I feel this is why the rules have been relaxed in some areas and tightened up in others. They dont want to DQ guys for scratching their nose and having it construed as a "signal" to a nearby boat. Yet be a minute late by absolute satellite time and its "see ya!" Just ask me! Online petitions are risky. What if Andy and Toms team stay on the "tear" they are on, and just through pure resentment the majority vote you gone? Nah, the Tournaments must enforce their policies, especially if it means banning a cheater, or you have nothing.

Until you have a bigger entity run with these events, we have what we have. In many cases, we as entrants should participate "in the spirit of the rule". We may have to self police in several areas to continue the integrity we all want. And the events must be willing to make the tough calls.

[Shade]

Capt. Vince,

First of all thank you for your response.

I believe when Tom put this comm. rule out here it was because there where some teams, I do not know how many, said they would once again enter the Oswego pro/am. Is changing the rule or rules the direction these events need to move forward and grow, probably not. Do the committes need to look over the structure and bring it to the new millinium, absolutly.My problem with the open comm rule is what I witnessed first hand and this is not the time or place for me to get specific. To me it is a form of cheating and I know that remark will po some fishermen.

I have only fished the Niagara Pro/Am 3 times since my return to Ontario 5 years ago. I fished with another team in the pro dinvision in the east end of the lake last year and I was an Observer 2 other times. My point is I have not seen growth in the participants in these 5 years. Here are some numbers just for the Pro division this year. These are just from the Niagara even to the Orleans event. The Niagara drew 49 pro teams. The following week in Orleans which is only 23 miles east dropped to 41 teams. Out of the 41 teams 14 teams did not fish Niagara, so in retrospect the entrants dropped from 49 to 27 coming out of Niagara to Orleans, thats a reduction of 60%. The Amature division went from 25 teams in Niagara to 15 in Orleans. The committee should be asking why? Maybe the other teams could not get time off from work, maybe it was a money issue or a few other reasons. The salution may be spreading the dates out a bit more who knows unless you do some research.

I volunteered to serve on the committte and I immediatly got an email from Bill congradulating me. Then , after sending a number of emails to the committee members to find out when and where they got together, I got another email from Bill telling me that Bob Cinelli would be contacting me. NEVER HAPPENED. So apparently the committees do not need any additional help they have everything in hand. The getting this national coverage is not the answer in building these events. It may bring on a few teams but teams from Micnigan and accross the border is what we want? Nothing personal to these guys and welcome, but if the committee would think out side the box they may increase participants right here in the four counties. But by allowing the contraversy that comes from every event and the Dont Like It Don't Fish It attitude these events will eventually lose more sponsorships and participants every year.

Howie

[get it wet]

Vince, Very well said!

In fact to add to your comments if I may. I find it very disburbing to hear how gray areas work because all participants understand what the rules state prior to parcipating. In the past we have DQ a box for cetain rules that had to be enforced and hated the fact we called it DQ because for example they are late or forgot to sign in in the morning ect.. not cheating just rules that are to be followed. but yet they are brushd with the same stroke as the guy that has extra rods in the water. We should police ourselves #1 and have rules that can be enforced #2

The Intent of the rule should superseed the rule! If you intend to leave a small fish on a core in order to wait for the bigger fish to come YOU ARE CHEATING! just because you see it and noone on your boat knows about it doesn't meant it OK. its cheating just like knocking a small fish off The intent was to kill a fish in order to get a bigger box.

In My opinion it is very hard to get 4-6 grown adults to cheat all at the same time without it coming out sometime. For the money we are fishing for you may be able to get a cheater to act in a derby where they are 1-2 anglers but in a tournament style you cant shut that many people up for life, it always comes out.

While we are on this topic, what the hell where the observers doing? Nothing as most observers are there to learn and watch on. Most observers we have had are great guys but dont know the rules and some dont even know what end of the rod to hold. I have heard of teams that stick them up front and dont see anything and others that are so drunk they cant write. Ask yourselves why do we have them. Should we worry that much about everybody else cheating or just worry about putting our own fish in the boat?

One of rules to look at make it where there is culling and you never have to worry about fish that are legal thrown back. The best chance issue wouldn't have been an issue.

Yvan

[Chasin Tail]

Vince:

I was more interested in how many people would be for Closed Communication. Not to petition an act, more of a count on how many people support reinstating it.

Rick:

I actually wrote that at 2 or 3 in the morning as I got a new laptop and couldn't sleep. LOL

[lundrs]

Yvan,

Don't use a shotgun when posting remarks. I have been an observer for a number of years.

I have observed and/ or fished with the following pro and am teams, Brillyant, Fishchopper, Orca,Trophy Teasers, Spoonfed, Horst Play, Black Dog, East Coast Boys etc, etc.

I have never shown up drunk or has the observer on the other boat.

I know which end of the rod to hold and I know the rules.

I do this because I love to fish and I am always trying to learn.

Put your shotgun away.

[get it wet]

hey you got me kind of off guard with your comments and went and reread my post to make sure I didn't put everyone in the same bowl. I must tell you to re read my post where it says that not ALL observers but SOME dont know one end of the rod and SOME are put up front and drunk.

But again my comment was all this cheating in MI with Observers! In an article BC2 said they havent done anything the other winning teams haven't done in the past. does that mean the observers in all the other boats has let this go as well?

Sorry if you took it personnally not meant to hurt anyone.

The observer thing can work but you must educate these people in order for them to know the rules of that individual tourney and if an questions arise they must ask to get a ruling.

Yvan