Pro Am Changes???

[Paul Czarnecki]

There has been a lot of discussion after the two West end ProAms about what changes people would like to see in the future tournaments. The success of the new "Gentlemen's Agreement" for No Communication has raised the following question......If the counties are going to host a ProAm should that tournament not be fished in the waters of that county? Much of the talk in recent years has been about "leveling the playing field" with regard to the communication issue. The recent events of Orleans, has no doubt, spawned this most recent cry to "level the playing field" by restricting or eliminating the advantage faster boats (and bigger wallets) have in their ability to run to another county to catch fish. We have seen it done for years and this is in NO WAY a criticism of those that have done it---as it has always been well within the rules to do so. That said, if we are "really" concerned about leveling the playing field, should we not all play on the SAME field?

[Dandyeyes]

What do you mean by "run time" ?

[ Post made via Android ]

[Paul Czarnecki]

"Run time" is the 15 minutes for Ams and the 30 minutes for Pros that is allowed between when you leave your dock to when you can start fishing.

[RUNNIN REBEL]

Paul good thought for 3 of the Pro-Ams BUT it could not be done with Oswego County Pro-Am borders. You could only fish the harbor east and under 250' of water. Cayuga county border due north eliminates most water off the college west.

RUNNIN REBEL (Yes RUNNIN-rebel----NOT County troller--- for us) Also FREE spirit ONLY in 1 county is an OXYMORON...i think????? i will ask Larry or Pat later.

RUNNIN-REBEL

Jerry

[fishman08]

Whether to run or not should be part of the decision of the team. Last week the teams that ran to wilson lost atleast two hours of fishing time... each team has to decide whether the reduce fishing time is worth it in the end or not. As for the talk of only fast boats being able to run well i saw yankee troller down in wilson, and we all know those trojans are pretty slow.

Anyone can say faster boats have an advantage but i could say the same about all the bigger boats like the trojans and the vikings. Although the bigger boats may not go as fast, they sure as hell handle big water better and don't roll as much giving your lures a much more normal action.

So I say leave the rule as it is... Each boat has it's own advantage...It's assinine to try and restrict the distance a boat can run.

[Traveling Circus]

Would a level playing field include a rod limit too? Say 8?

8 can be a spaghetti mess in the back of my boat..... let alone 10..... or more .

[troubles]

I'm not sure if it's possible for me to tell which county i'm in on the water.GPS tell you that? If a team wants to run that far it's a gamble and there's a lot of luck involved. Lets face it with the rules as they are there's a lot of luck involved anyway based on the size of the fish caught- If everyone's playing by the rules. Are they? Leave it the way it is.

[Fishtails]

Can't say as I agree with this proposed change Paul. It wouldn't "level" the playing field at all. Honestly, there are more important rules that should be addressed by the committee if the true objective is to level the playing field. Why not finish the current project before starting a new one? The fact that the No Comm is not going to become a pro am rule after having a better than 50% sign up with the gentlemens agreement 2 events in a row is pretty much BS...IMHO.

This is what I saw (please correct me if I am wrong)....The head of the committee signs the no comm in Niagara and fails to make the money. THEN....doesn't sign in Orleans and wins it.....Gee, ya think there could be a personal agenda there? I wonder why he is against no comm....lmao! All the excuses about enforcement are nothing but smoke and mirrors, but that's just my opinion.

As far as running, I have always personally struggled with the idea of running, as it has burned me more times than not. That being said, it's part of the decision making process that every team goes through....and should continue to go through It's part of the process that makes tournament fishing so great!! If you want to restrict the smaller faster boats from running to other counties to find fish, than I propose the bigger boats that have an advantage in rougher conditions downsize to a smaller boat....rediculous, right? My point is simply that you will NEVER level the playing field. Someone will always have an advantage. One tourney it may be the faster boats that run, next tourney it may be the bigger boats that are more stable in 6 footers. If someone can't deal with that, they shouldn't fish tournaments.

Other than that, I really don't have an opinion on the subject

[Tim Bromund]

Would a level playing field include a rod limit too? Say 8?

8 can be a spaghetti mess in the back of my boat..... let alone 10..... or more .

Mike, that already exists, 6 rod limit for am teams and 8 for pro teams.

Tim

[ray koziatek]

Where is option 4 please....................

ya know shhhhhhhhhh!

[spoonfed-1]

Not sure I want to worry about what county I'm in while on the water.

My vote is leave as it is.

Glen

[Gill-T]

Leave the boundries as is. I would like to add that for the safety of contestants, if lightening is seen EVERYONE should be pulled off the water to a safe harbor until such time boats can return with time added. I was shocked once again at the Niagara event that I was the only one who pulled rods and came in early (no I had not boxed yet ) In pro golf, if the tournament officials see one lightening bolt, play is delayed until safe. Unfortunately, money makes people make poor decisions and maybe we need oversight to protect us from our own stupidity.

[Paul Czarnecki]

OK.....good responses so far guys but let me clear up a few things.....

--First of all this is NOT a Committee Proposal, a Director's Proposal or anything of the sort. This was an IDEA that was presented to ME as a Competitor and it has nothing to do with any committee or Director. I simply threw this poll together after speaking with several competitors over the past week. In fact, I even hesitated for several days because I didn't want everyone to think I was pushing an agenda or had some ulterior motive. AGAIN.....this is an idea for discussion ONLY.

--Secondly, the "parameters" or borders of each tournament could be set up as an "area of competition". The areas of competition would be set individually for each tournament according to the "county line" or in Oswego could be set to include any specific area. We already have to record GPS numbers so the system is already in place to enforce it.

--Thirdly, this idea was formulated out of discussions about the No Comm agreement where almost everyone in favor of it said it would "level the playing field". IN MY OPINION, everyone having to compete in the same general area is an extension of the "level playing field" ideal. If you were in favor of the NO Comm Agreement because you didn't want to get beat by a "bigger or better network" how can you NOT be in favor of this idea? Why should a bigger (or smaller), faster boat or someone with a bigger wallet have an advantage? A level playing field should be a level playing field in ALL areas. I, personally, would feel MUCH better winning a tournament by beating everyone in ONE SPOT instead of just having a secret spot that gave me an advantage over everyone else.

Again.....this poll was put up simply as a discussion point about an issue that has been on several minds for several years. It is NOT a "proposal" or an "agenda" that anyone is trying to push through---I am just looking for ideas and your feelings on the subject.

Thanks,

Paul

[Traveling Circus]

Thanks Tim...

[Fishtails]

how can you NOT be in favor of this idea? Why should a bigger (or smaller), faster boat or someone with a bigger wallet have an advantage? A level playing field should be a level playing field in ALL areas. I, personally, would feel MUCH better winning a tournament by beating everyone in ONE SPOT instead of just having a secret spot that gave me an advantage over everyone else.

Ok Paul, then answer me this....why should a team fishing out of a larger 13 ft beam trojan have an advantage over a team fishing out of an 8 ft beam boat in 6-8 footers (which happened at least twice last year) ? You yourself just said we should be on a level playing field in ALL areas. You can't honestly tell me there is no advantage to fishing out of a larger boat....the advantages are many. I'm sure if we were standing on the dock drinking a beer and having this conversation, you'd say "Rod....if you feel that way then buy a bigger boat". So my rebuttal to the above quote is that those who don't have the ability or means to run greater distances should buy a faster, or more economical boat. To say limiting our fishing boundries would make for a level playing field is a stretch.

What is being discussed would simply stack the deck in favor of local charter boats that just want to work their home waters by taking away the little guys, the fast boats and out of towners ability to run a little further when the weather allows for it. Our ability to run IS how we level the playing field. I have been beaten many times by teams willing to run further than I was.....never once ****ed about it because the choice not to run was a team decision.

[Capt Vince Pierleoni]

The very best choice may be no choice at all, leaving it the way it is, but lets not shoot the messenger. I too, am frustrated with the majority wanting closed comm, past-present-future. I don't know what it will take to re-instate closed comm, but it needs to happen. All of the rules can be beaten or abused if the observer is hung over or sleeping, but by their sheer existence they make an abuser a CHEATER. History shows the fishing world does not tolerate or forgive a person or a team that would screw their peers.

It may be a waste of time to take a poll when the "players" opinions or wishes are not considered, but nonetheless this is good debate. The best and fairest choice may be the 2nd one. It has been brought to my attention that in B.A.S.S. and Saltwater tournaments there are no boundries but there is no run time either. Run to "Hot" fish, pay the price. Stay home and grind, gain fishing time. Seems it could add strategy. As I have stated before, my position on all the rules discussions is I am for whatever the majority wants. I want to see GROWTH.

[A-TOM-MIK]

-all of a sudden the "past not so important" ideals of leveling the playing field are now important due to different "aspects" of a tournament, lol

-there should of been a 4th option in this poll-

"No changes at all except for closing communication" I like it exactly the way it is except for that single rule

-Rod, spot on !!! Nothing like pinning the tail on the ________ !!!

If you were in favor of the NO Comm Agreement because you didn't want to get beat by a "bigger or better network" how can you NOT be in favor of this idea?

easy enough answer to this that most would probably agree to: We would rather have a NO COMMUNICATION rule to level the playing field, we are fine with who runs where and who owns what boat !!

-funny how the dictator sits back with a sh*t eating grin as most continually struggle with all this, it will all come to a head some day, now rumor has it there is this large meeting taking place at seasons end, because there are important discussions that need to take place......... Well DUH NO SH*T !!!! The players want a rule change and a few of the well known highly liked players have had to employ STRONG ARMING tactics against their friends !!! Sounds pretty harsh, but that sh*t eating grin hasn't flinched. There's a few morals for you !!!

Tom

[Fishtails]

Hope I wasn't shooting the messanger ....Paul is my big buddy. Besides, I know better than to get into an intellectual battle with Paul

A possible rule change like this should to be viewed from ALL perspectives. If we stay quiet, next thing ya know we are looking at our gps trying to figure out when we gotta turn

Vince....how do we get you on the Pro Am committee? You'd be the best thing that could ever happen to the Pro Am series.

[Paul Czarnecki]

Hope I wasn't shooting the messanger ....Paul is my big buddy. Besides, I know better than to get into an intellectual battle with Paul

LOLOL.......no problem Rod. I like your opinions and value our friendship greatly. Unfortunately, what "could" have been a great discussion had to be hijacked, YET AGAIN, by a troll that came out from under his rock. His only intention is to destroy the ProAms so he hijacks every thread about them trying to use them for his own selfish agenda. Oswego must be very proud!

[landingzone]

I would like to add that for the safety of contestants, if lightening is seen EVERYONE should be pulled off the water to a safe harbor until such time boats can return with time added. I was shocked once again at the Niagara event that I was the only one who pulled rods and came in early (no I had not boxed yet ) In pro golf, if the tournament officials see one lightening bolt, play is delayed until safe. Unfortunately, money makes people make poor decisions and maybe we need oversight to protect us from our own stupidity.

I agree, it should have been called by tournament control. We also put ourselves at a big disadvantage, in the interest of safety, by leaving the lake.

[Legacy]

The very best choice may be no choice at all, leaving it the way it is, but lets not shoot the messenger. I too, am frustrated with the majority wanting closed comm, past-present-future. I don't know what it will take to re-instate closed comm, but it needs to happen. All of the rules can be beaten or abused if the observer is hung over or sleeping, but by their sheer existence they make an abuser a CHEATER. History shows the fishing world does not tolerate or forgive a person or a team that would screw their peers.

It may be a waste of time to take a poll when the "players" opinions or wishes are not considered, but nonetheless this is good debate. The best and fairest choice may be the 2nd one. It has been brought to my attention that in B.A.S.S. and Saltwater tournaments there are no boundries but there is no run time either. Run to "Hot" fish, pay the price. Stay home and grind, gain fishing time. Seems it could add strategy. As I have stated before, my position on all the rules discussions is I am for whatever the majority wants. I want to see GROWTH.

:yes:

[ray koziatek]

In the past when bad winds and weather were the prediction ,at the Capt. meeting a any port in a storm was discused...without penalty..but no extension of time..Im shure if tourny control was contacted (maybe) a safty break could of been permitted...With many boxes in line by 10am and 40 to50 by precheck (noon)as the storm rolled in it was gettin close to the 1pm for ams weighin ..the current" Inclamate weather rule" is in place to keep all involved (mostly volenteers) with weighin and scoring and to keep derby running on time as much as possable and safty.. with the possabilty of boats being spread out 20 to 40 miles each way im shure many were missed by the fast moving narrow band storm...

With that said tourny control should be prepared for a possiable missguided weather prediction at every tourny, not that it ever happens. with a briefin at the meetings.

Maybe any boat that feels they could sit out a fast movin storm could call in on radio with team number ,make note on last fishline filled on score sheet of port, time stoped fishin ,and time left port after storm passed and another call to tourny control to resume fishing.... but no extended fishin time for the above reasons ..

It says pretty clear in the rules about bad weather and for those of us who have fished a few of these ,we fished in some conditions that were less than fun............BUT THATS THE PART OF DERBY FISHIN THAT GETS MY BLOOD FLOWING..........tho a gentle wind with nice sun is a good thing for the tanlines...........wanna see?

[TOP SECRET]

Lot of good thoughts here (and a troll). I dont envy anyone that runs a tournament as you will never make everyone happy! I voted to have a boundary as I liked the idea of everyone fishing the same general area... Not necessarily just the county but maybe 20 miles east/west. However people bring up a good point of having to monitor their gps being a pain... So I'd like to change my vote to no change

I didnt fish the proam in Niagara, but was out there and ran in to beat the storm... I was amazed by how many captains chose to stay out, not just from the lightning but also the squal warning, but it was their decision to make and I'm ok with that.

[ Post made via Android ]

[Shade]

Paul,

I take my hat off to you for at least posting an avenue to help in the no comm quest. As the ONLY committee member who not only signed the agreement but is joining the march to eliminate it. You are correct this could have been one of the few threads that had the potential of good discussion.

I attended a seminar sponsored by LOTSA this past February and was excited over the 2 professionals who were the co speakers. What I did not know, until now, was one was against communications in the Pro/Am and the other was not. The one thing the instuctor, who was FOR comm, forgot to mention was before you worry about programs, down speed and trolling direction is to make sure you have a solid communication network. This was evident in the different outcomes between the Niagara and Orleans Pro/Am's. in the signing and not signing the no comm agreements.

I like the idea of Vince becoming a member of the Pro/Am committee and I would also like to see Pete as well. My questions though are:

1)WHO ARE THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS ALONG WITH THEIR ROLLS IN EACH EVENT?

2)HOW DO YOU BECOME A MEMBER?

I know from experience that volunteering is not a way, so what is?

All I know it is time for a change. If any of you raining members have any self respect or compassion for this event either liston to what we participants are asking for or please step down and allow this event to grow.

Howie

[Gill-T]

The problem with not having clear lightening parameters is it becomes a money issue. A 30 M Trojan having spent xxx #'s in gas getting to the sacred fishing grounds will not want to pull lines and come to port.....esp. if fishing time is lost. But what about one of the crew members who has young kids and a family at home and feels pressured not to say anything to the captain? Make it clear and safe. Call boats to port and give us our lost time back. I am sure every Captain's license course covers lightening safety.......many of us failed to cover the tenant that the captain is RESPONSIBLE for the crews' safety....radar towers be damned. For the record we pulled lines at 10:50 am when the shat hit the fan, so there was lots of time left in the day. The rain continued but the lightening stopped around 12:00????