Lamoka Lake Tournament?

[Nalod]

Zach,

 

I think  we have the same mentality.  When someone beats me, I want to learn how they did it and how can I improve my game to be able to compete in the future (I dragged Chad to the PMTT awards ceremony each year just so I could listen to the cashing teams explain what they used, how they did it, and their philosophies on the water...an amazing learning experience!)  I also believe that a good majority of the guys that were in the tournaments the last few years have a similar take on the matter.  My biggest concern though is that I really hope that our tournaments drastically increase (in participation) in the future...so I am thinking more for other guys not currently participating or just getting into the sport and how we can peak their interest in trying the tournaments without scaring them off and also retaining them for years to come.

 

Hopefully a few more eyes will see this thread this weekend and chime in with their toughts...it is great to hear everyone's opinions.  I really liked the idea when it was first explained to me and hopefully it has been fully explained here for others to read.  Also, I am hoping we get the views from guides/captains, people that have fished our tournaments every year, people that had fished our tournaments in the past but no longer fish them, newcomers to musky fishing, etc...the full gambit of opinions!

 

Thanks,

 

--Joe

[Nalod]

Just reminiscing:  I remember one year having the tourney go over the 125 cap.  Larry decided (based on LOU opinion, I believe) to allow anyone over that cap to still enter, but make 100% of their entry fees go to the baitfish fund...I do not think I was ever more excited to fish a tourney knowing that there were that many to compete with and that something big was going to get caught!

 

I was also one of the many that would always pay as soon I as I possibly could...the early entry giveaways he had each year were always amazing!

[Tigerhunter]

I do think a team should somehow be rewarded for catching more than 3 fish.

Say team "A" catches 10 fish with their three biggest being 40, 40, 40.

Team "B" catches 3 fish, a 40, 40, 41.

Although team A caught 7 more fish (which is amazing when you talk about muskie) they would lose out to team B because of 1".

I would say giving a point or half point for each fish over your 3 fish limit could be a way to "compensate" a team for catching a lot of fish.

Or we could say....too bad, 3-fish is the rule...

Either way, I like the team format and we could try the 3 fish rule for 1 tourney or an entire season and see how everyone likes it. If it doesn't work out, we could always revert back.



Sent from my iPhone using Lake Ontario United

[Tigerhunter]

Also, I would love to see those kind of numbers for participants, the tourneys are way more fun when you have a big crowd!


Sent from my iPhone using Lake Ontario United

[Ronix 51]

The 3 best format actually sounds kind of interesting to me and i'd be down to give it a go.

 

Regarding the trolling/casting advantages/disadvantages here's my take:

 

*Disclaimer- I constantly get my ass handed to me by the trollers during the spring time CHQ tourney it doesn't make a difference to me one bit i'm just out there fishing and having fun and will continue to do so regardless of tournament format so this is just me throwing stuff out there.

 

Sure, people can always step outside their comfort zone and give trolling a try like you said Zach. But, some people may not be equipped with all the necessary trolling gear or sure you could always just hold onto the rod while putting around which likely won't be able to touch the guys running a 6 rod spread with 4 boards way out and 2 down rods covering much more water and that's fine there is absolutely nothing wrong with those styles of fishing but it's just something to think about.

 

The reason the 3 best fish idea is interesting to me is because it certainly adds more strategy to the mix and it's more welcoming to both sides (love how i'm talking about casters and trollers like they're political parties lmao) in the sense that maybe we have people who don't bother with the spring time CHQ tourney because they are die hard casters and see that there is no point in entering, which in the end ultimately leads to less potential participation - hypothetically speaking. It still rewards the people for catching more fish since you can pick and choose your top 3 fish to compete. i.e.e boat A has 4 legal fish: 39.5, 43, 30 and 40.5. Boat B has 6 fish: 38, 38, 30, 31.5, 37, and 40. Boat A is still in the running to compete for 1st despite being behind 2 fish so there is still that "any given moment" competitiveness feel. Besides isn't that what these tourneys are about, a fun competition between fellow anglers/friends? Haha it's not like anyone is depending on these tournament winnings to support themselves I sure hope first place cash isn't the main driver for participation....although Tigerhunter and Blue Eye could definitely use the money for diaper funds...

 

And regards to potential cheating: I don't think it's any different in terms of creating a greater likelihood for people to cheat under that format than it would under the current points system. Truth is, when you think about it any one of us could easily lie, take a misleading photo, etc. but I like to think we are all honest and respectable muskie nuts who just want to compete, have fun, learn something new from someone else, and shoot the **** afterwards with one another.

 

That's my .02. Like I said, I don't have a horse in either race I'll still be out there having fun either way. Good discussion gents

 

 

[zach]

Good points gentelman and please know I appreciate your time and effort to post. Great topic and nice to hear both sides.

I will bring this up at the next meeting and will have an answer for the ya'll when it's over.

I can say I was against the 3 fish rule at first but I maybe coming around.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Lake Ontario United mobile app

[EsoxOnly]

Does anyone know if this change would have had any affect on the results in any recent MI derbys? I have only fished a few in the last year as a member but I don't recall anyone in those derbys producing over three fish. I'm looking forward to attending some of these tourneys that present this concern in the coming season.
My opinion is the opposite for what it's worth. I believe that we should only be scoring (let alone awarding prizes for) mature legal fish. In my opinion the process of CPR on legal "trophy" sized fish should be what we as a club want to promote and put in the spot light. As opposed to promoting and rewarding the unnecessary handling and photo taking of sub legal fish.
I also think this change is one step towards the mindset that every angler deserves a trophy just for participating. When I go out and win a muskie tourney I'd like to know it's because I out fished every other angler that day. Not because of some handicap rule. (As in the golf scoring system.)
These are just my thoughts and opinions. I'm am all for whatever change the club makes. Whether it lines up perfectly with my views isn't what's most important to me. We are all part of the club for the same reasons.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Lake Ontario United mobile app

[muskiedreams]

If we limited entries to legal size fish, there would be a huge possibility in some tournaments that there would not be enough team results that qualify for three prize places. With going to the team format it is more likely than it would have been with the individual format. The size limits set by the state was for the purpose of limiting the number of fish that are kept, especially by meat hunters and incidental catches. It wasn't and couldn't be intended to limit catch sizes and prohibit photos. With that said, this is were efforts of MI and other musky fishing organizations to educate the public on proper C&R and the importance of it.

 

We still must try to make sure that we don't cause mortality in our tournaments through stressing education of and the importance of good CPR practices. I think it might be worthwhile discussing the possibility of raising the minimum size to qualify for particular waters depending on looking at statistics from past tournament and maybe non-tournament  catches. For instance, raising the limit on Chautauqua to 34, 35 or 36 inches but still using the points schedule for each size.

 

Maybe we could also consider giving 1 or 2 points for fish caught and released that are under the minimum size to enter, requiring only an in water picture (minimum) to qualify and in water or out of water measurement or guesstimate optional. This might help for occasional tournaments where the fish just have lock jaw and only one boat gets qualifying fish but others get dinks.

 

The Lunge Log could be a valuable tool for the purpose or determining catch size ranges and trends per body of water if we could get all members to log in all their fish with quick in water measurement being acceptable. Maybe there could be an incentive such as each Lunge Log entry qualifying for an entry into a monthly drawing for a prize. We could also try to find and review past tourney records and maybe tourney records from other chapters and clubs as well as keeping an accurate log to help determine any appropriate changes to minimum entry size for a body of water.

 

If any of you are familiar with the C&R data that the NMA keeps you know how valuable it is. Especially because of the awesome work that Tony Schime puts into formatting and analyzing the data. They do try to encourage members to log in their catches but Many members don't constantly log their catches and they don't have a diary format which can be much more helpful to determine catch rates as well as catch rates for a particular size range. The NYS diary studies are great for that.

Edited February 19, 2017 by muskiedreams

[muskiedreams]

It would be nice to get more opinions on a 3 largest fish rule from anglers who consistently catch > 3 as well as those who are new and/or have limited time to spend on the water and/or resources limiting their success. There should be a certain amount of advantage for those who spend more time on the water but also a real possibility of a rookie winning a prize and gaining valuable experience and incentive to continue in the sport.

Edited February 19, 2017 by muskiedreams

[BlueEye]

Good morning gentlemen,

 

I've really enjoyed reading the ideas and feedback about the 3 biggest fish format.  It's great we can have this civil conversation - LOU really does have the best group of muskies guys.  Here is my two cents for what it is worth... I think Adam and EsoxOnly have asked the right question on would this new rule have actually changed any of the past results?  To my knowledge the answer is No - those that won the past couple years tournaments would have still won under the three big fish rule.  That said, I think a three big fish format does have some merit worth considering; specifically how it shifts the strategy of some anglers and levels the playing field (not a lot, but a little) for less experienced anglers.  If the goal of the club is increased participation, that may not be a bad thing. 

 

For someone like me, a 3 big fish rule would dramatically change the strategy of the tournament.  It's not always easy to catch three fish (so make no mistake, this is still a numbers tournament) and it brings a lot more teams back into contention.  I also think then it spreads the whole lake out more (i.e., we won't be targeting all 30" fish then or maybe we will if it is a tough bite that day).  A newbie angler that gets lucky and catches their personal best musky, now would stand a chance of cashing against even the seasoned angler that boated 5+ or more fish that day that were all in the low 30" range. 

 

I also agree with EsoxOnly that if I win a tournament, I want to know that it's because I out fished everyone else - in the same way the biggest salmon tournaments or bass tournaments or walleye tournaments would limit your catch numbers, it is to add an additional variable to the equation (i.e., can you catch BIG fish?).  In my salmon tournament world, it would be easy for anglers to go out and run small spoons up high in the water column and target skipper kings and run huge numbers of them.  This puts unnecessary pressure on smaller fish and doesn't tell you anything about the angler skill (i.e., you can run any color lure at virtually any speed and still catch them).  In the current setup, someone that "out fishes" an angler with two (2) 45" fish by catching five (5) sub-35" fish is debatable.  I know afterwards, I would be more interested in talking with the guy that boated two 45" fish that day.  It's like the salmon guy that wins by catching 12 skipper kings over the guy that boated 3 thirty-pounders.  Your biggest tournaments on Lake Ontario (King of the Lake, Lake Ontario Pro AMs, Sandy Creek Shootout, WI Invitational, etc. etc.) all impose a fish limit to truly measure angler skill.  This holds true in the nations largest bass and walleye tournaments as well.   

 

I believe that a no fish limit is a better idea for situations like the PMTT where you know the entire field is going to be seasoned anglers, or on bodies of water that are not heavily stocked.  There obviously would never be a need for a limit on a body of water like the St. Larry.

 

Keeping in mind the goal of the club is increased participation, when you get a field of a couple seasoned anglers and the majority of people just out there trying to learn and have fun, they might get discouraged if they feel like they don't have any chance (which they don't cause your seasoned anglers know how to run numbers on Chautauqua).  The 3 fish minimum would increase their chances and keep their interest peeked because as Ronix pointed out, you would always be just one or two fish away from possibly cashing. 

 

Seems like the magic formula for imposing a catch limit is 3-fold:  (1) a points based tournament with (2) a wide range of angler experience (3) on a heavily stocked body of water.

 

Now all this said, I will revert back to the original question from Adam & EsoxOnly, does this rule change affect past results, NO (to my knowledge) - but could it impact the tournament in a wide variety of other ways (including future results) - Absolutely.

 

Happy Presidents Day -

Chad

 

[EsoxOnly]

Thank you Chad. There is allot of info there for a new guy like me to take in. Very well said.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Lake Ontario United mobile app

[John Edward]

Call me crazy but this is completely changing the convo up a bit but I always thought it would be fun to have a tournament through musky inc for one day where everyone can fish their favorite musky waters and compete for biggest fish of that day and figure a way out to enter results to one person with video/pics etc. It would allow guys that live far away to compete with everyone for one day that normally can't make it for whatever reason even if it is just for fun. Plus it would make for a good article in the magazine. Just a thought lol


Sent from my iPhone using Lake Ontario United

[zach]

Blueeye, I do need to say that there is more than just 30" fish in the south end, most true 50's come outta the south end of Chautauqua

Sent from my SM-G900V using Lake Ontario United mobile app

[zach]

Biggest fish I've ever seen on that lake I lost trolling a pretty baby jtd wiley over 16 fow just south of the bridge.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Lake Ontario United mobile app

[Tigerhunter]

Call me crazy but this is completely changing the convo up a bit but I always thought it would be fun to have a tournament through musky inc for one day where everyone can fish their favorite musky waters and compete for biggest fish of that day and figure a way out to enter results to one person with video/pics etc. It would allow guys that live far away to compete with everyone for one day that normally can't make it for whatever reason even if it is just for fun. Plus it would make for a good article in the magazine. Just a thought lol


Sent from my iPhone using Lake Ontario United

I really like this idea! I would like to attend all the tourneys but the distance really limits which ones I can fish (usually 0 or 1 tourneys).

What does everyone else think about this?


Sent from my iPhone using Lake Ontario United