2009 Pro Am Rule Changes

[MyTurn]

My Turn:

Polls will not over-turn decisions that aren't of the committees liking, that has been proven !!

It is certain excuses will follow as to why a majority decision from a poll will not become a rule !!

Its been proven from past polls !!

Unless comity members are now willing to favor a wider variety of participants and lose the excuses that followed last time favoring their own decisions?

Tom

o kay... whatever you say (cuz I really have no clue what you are saying). I was merely suggesting a poll to help compile the results of this now 4 page and counting thread so that those who do not have all afternoon to fish through the whole thing with pencil and paper at hand can easily see what the consensus is.

FWIW I think going to 3 divisions as described on the first page of this thread is a terrible idea. More complication is not what is needed.

[Fishtails]

FWIW I think going to 3 divisions as described on the first page of this thread is a terrible idea. More complication is not what is needed.

You may indeed be correct My Turn, but then again I don't know If you are privy to the "newly proposed Am rule changes" that the committee has been kicking around for next year, so If not, you may be lacking the information needed to make a logical fact based assessment.

My plan Is/was not intended to change the current structure or make It more complicated. It Is/was simply intended to SAVE the current Am division many of us love to fish, and allowing for a NEW division to impose the newly "committee suggested" rules/ or lack thereof. I think some of the proposed changes would absolutely destroy the Am division. Not good timing with the Scotties coming to town!! If this thread helps do nothing but keep the rules as they were last year.....that would be great!!!!

I never said it was the answer My Turn....just an Idea. Maybe you are aware of the Proposed changes? If so, I don't see how you can say It's a terrible Idea? If I could come forth and post the proposed changes, it would be clear and make more sense to everybody, but I am not at liberty to do so and I am a man of my word so you'll all just have to read between the lines

I certainly have no ties with the Pro Am committee, and I don't speak for them. I just happened to be involved with some discussions with two of the four committee members and both pitched their ideas to me to get an "inner perspective" from someone who fishes the division. I mentioned I'd bring It up on Lou, but without going into detail. Why not leave out the sarcasm and take this opportunity to be productive and help them keep the Pro Ams the most prestigious Tournaments on the south shore of lake Ontario!!

Hey...at least I'm courageous enough to toss out an idea and sign my name on it for folks like yourself to call terrible. We are all still awaiting your suggestions to address next years issues My Turn, and to sign your posts with your name so I know who I'm speaking to

[MyTurn]

From original post:

So please give your ideas on how to implement change that would be designed to grow the Am division and draw new teams without complicating the event for those In charge.

Thanks....I will follow up with my proposal.

but then again I don't know If you are privy to the "newly proposed Am rule changes" that the committee has been kicking around for next year, so If not, you may be lacking the information needed to make a logical fact based assessment.

Sorry if I hurt your feelings but I thought based on the above that PEOPLE'S OPINIONS were what you were looking for.

If only those in the "inner circle" are qualified to express an opinion in this matter, WTF is the purpose of this thread?

..., and to sign your posts with your name so I know who I'm speaking to.

BTW my name is Peter Kelly, I see yours is "Rod"

[Dodger]

I have been fishing these tournaments for years and really really enjoy them. To think they may make them into another derby disappoints the hell out of me. These tournaments create competitiveness unmatched by derbies. Here is my 2 cents on the concerns:

To eliminate the Challenge Cup is a horrible idea. Its like the NHL eliminating the Stanley Cup. Its a goal, something to strive for. There is history behind the cup, since 1994 teams like Prime Time, Cannonball, Liquid Plummer, Screamer (to name a few) are recogonized by this cup for their acheivements. To take the cup and throw it in the trash can is

demeaning to this group.

The "no cull" rule should be eliminated or change the 6 fish limit back to 9.

The observer is needed to keep the integrity of the tournament in tack. 99% of the obsevers are good folks and I look forward to seeing many of them at the events. To those who do not enter because of the observer: you are missing out on a lot of enjoyment, meeting some of the best people/sportsmen you'll ever know and the excitement of the competition. Plus these tournaments will make you a better fisherman.

Lie detector ..........I'm not to comfortable with this idea but would not take it off the table. Would need to hear more.

Entry fee/Payouts..........No amateur money should be diverted to the Pro div.

Water boundries.........Keep us in US waters. We don't need added expenses such as Canadian licenses.

Communication between boats. I can go either way but would prefer this being eliminated. Its a big disadvantage to new teams who have not formed any alliances and are expected to compete with teams that are talking to each other. It is also a bigger advantage to teams who have alliances with some of the Pro teams.

Question? Why does the Niagara tourney draw over 40+ boats and the others have a hard time making 30? Some comparison should be done.

All in all I agree with Fishtails, Spoonfed and others to keep it the same or make minimal tweaks to improve. I also back up the idea of going to 3 divisions if they are planning to make this event more "Amateurish". There is a core group of amateur teams that fish all or most derbies that look forward to the competitiveness of these tournaments. Please don't spoil this for us.

JIm

[GAMBLER]

I do not fish the Pro Ams because of the cost of traveling, gas, docking fees, and lodging. I'm looking at fishing at least one this summer with my buddy. I have mentioned this before but everyone jumped all over me, add a Monroe County Pro am. This way more of the Rochester area guys that can't afford to trailer their boats and pay for lodging could enter. I know this will screw up the lake cup but I think it would get more people to enter that had not entered before. I would do it in a heart beat.

I have read the rules and agree with most. I don't really like the no cull rule for the earlier tournies. I think a cooler full of skippers makes for a less competitive tourney. It makes it more competitive when you have to make the decision to throw it in the cooler for points or throw it back and risk a limit.

[Missdemeanor]

Brian, Rochester had one way before the Oak and Sodus.....Typical of the area, the interest was low. I fished it for the last three years it was held. The number of participants was less and less every year till it eventually died.............We''l see what happens I guess.

[3dfx]

i have been following this thread with plenty of interest, we fished the niagara county pro/am every year rochester and oswego. we participated in the first one in niagara, monroe and oswego counties and fished them for many years watching the changes occur. my friends and i chose to not fish them years ago for many reasons relating to what we saw/considered undesireable rules changes. i am not sure what i say matters here because we don't fish them anymore BUT we dont fish them for a reason. i must say that i get what atomik is saying and agree with him 100%. it really doesn't matter WHAT we think regarding rules changes because the fellows that make/change the rules have agendas and stakes in prize money when fishing these "tournaments". it is honarable what the guys from lotsa stand behind and that they take a role in attempting to better this thing in niagara. if i am not mistaken.... representatives from lotsa sit or sat on the comittee a while back and really had no impact? imho.... their time spent in discussions with the so called commite is moot, the commitee listens the reps from losta leave and nothing changes unfortunately. we feel that the open communication rule ruined this "tournament" for many while almost guaranteeing others a place in the top 10 and at least winning some money. there has never been a consistent explanation regarding the decision relating to this and that is not a good thing! just another reason to have an observer, when the teams board the boat in the morning all cell phones and pagers go into a zip-loc bag and the observer holds until the end of the day.....its really quite simple. fool proof???? no! you will always have cheaters no matter what. brings me to my next point........ i and my team mates have personally witnessed basically what we would call the good ole boy network relating to observers, depending on who the team was or whom they had relationships with generally dictated how the comitte would sway regarding potential or full blown protests no matter what the observer says. not gonna go there though! as for amature monies going into the pro division i have been wondering where that extra money came from for the "extra pot" that was announced on the last day of niagara last year. funny that the commitee is all of a sudden interested in listening with the scotty tournament knocking at the door. it is a reality but very unfortunate that politics plays such a role in this "tournament". i have to say that i am sure that there are some fair and honest volunteers on the commitee/commitees and i am sure the participants appreciate your efforts but one must ask themselves if what they say really matters? anyhow gonna get off my pedestal now and take my bashing now as i did last spring. there is a reason why we don't fish the pro/ams but WILL fish some of the scottys. and btw the scotty is just as much of a tournament as the pro/am so leave those comments out.....been there heard that! dave

[Fishtails]

There are a lot of great opinions on this thread, especially pertaining to the rules. Any more Ideas on how to get more teams involved without ruining the integrity of the current Am. division?

For what it's worth:

I am for keeping the observer. If you want a "no observer" division, add a third entry level division as earlier proposed.

I am for NO communication also. I admit that I spend my time talking on the cell, but I'd prefer to have the no communication rule brought back.

I am for culling In Niagara only. Especially with the impending short supply of one year old kings we will be seeing next year.

[Gill-T]

I am not sure what the argument for culling at Niagara, but NOT Orleans. Water temp is not a consideration during the Orleans. I understand boxes are harder to come by in the Orleans, but that should not matter, you have the choice.....you can always keep the smaller fish. Oswego, and Sodus.....forget it, the water is too warm. Sorry Rod, another culling post.

[Just Cover]

No Observer. The teams in the Pro/Am have to stay off the water 24 hours before the tournament begins. One guy who works for the tournament checks the boats and coolers for the AM Division before they leave. When the boats return the coolers are again checked then taped shut. If the seal is broken before the person doing the weigh in breaks it then you lose the fish. The top teams in the end take a lie dector.

[L&M]

New one to me. How many pro-am's have you done? :?: :roll:

[Gill-T]

The problem with officials pre-checking coolers is......the officials. Getting enough "officials" to police the send-off would be a problem. In the Oswego event contestants can leave from two different ports....mayhem to try to run an event like that. I like the idea of "no prefishing 24 hours in advance" because it levels the field. However, I think a lot of teams have fun with the Friday pre-fish events and after all that is what these events are about.....fun.

[Just Cover]

I fished only one, but have been fishing every summer when they have been going on. The main reason only one is because of the Observer. I have a decent drive and fish with my dad and brother. I know there are a decent amount of boats that have to be checked out. If you have to assign two people from the tournament to check boats before then it could be done. I fished a bunch of Striper and Bass tournaments where they would keep you off the lake 24 hours before. Check in would be 2 hours before light where you would have your boats and coolers checked. After you come in the coolers are checked and sealed. The seal is broken once the fish are placed onto the scale. Any questions then the team is given a lie dectator test. This eliminates the observer and more teams will enter.

[Just Cover]

Sure its about having fun. Move the pre-fish to Thursay. I think the biggest question and problem is fishermans honesty. A few bad apples ruin it for everyone. Just like some people like stealing that is why we have locks. The check in time two hours before, coolers being sealed off the docks and lie decator test I believe will work and more fisherman would fish the tournaments .

[Tim Bromund]

Just Cover,

Just my opinion. With the way lake conditions can change in a days time, if you really wanted to kill the pro ams, not letting anyone pre-fish the day before the tournament is a good way to do it.

Tim

[spoonfed-1]

I keep reading on this thread "I won't fish the pro-ams because I got to have an observer." Bull_ _ it. There are all kinds of rediculous ways you can come up with to eliminate the observer and each has it's own set of inconvienences and faults. Now lets see, we can create all kinds of turmoil and open the door to cheating and a decreased quality experience or guess what.... we can use observers and keep an even playing field for all involved. What a concept.

I read this anti observer crap but haven't read one good reason why we should not have observers.

My reasons for keeping the observers are it maintains the quality and integrety of the tournaments. That seems like a pretty good reason to me. Anybody else?

Keep it simple.

Glen

[L&M]

Fun ta watch Tim & Glen. He still hasn't answered the ? of how many he has fished with only 3 posts all about this subject.

[Just Cover]

One....I said it above. I am sorry I dont have 5000 posts. I guess the more posts you have the better you are at fishing :roll:

[MyTurn]

My reasons for keeping the observers are it maintains the quality and integrety of the tournaments.

Glen

It doesn't.

In 7 years of fishing the Niagara Pro Am I have had an observer that was so drunk he slept all day (until he finally puked), and an observer who did not know a Salmon from a carp. I have also had several observers who took their job very seriously and did an outstanding job.

Point is, the observer thing is a crap shoot, and as long as there is no quality control of the observers then their presence guarantees nothing.

[spoonfed-1]

I fished almost every proam for 5 years now. Had one less than desireable

observer, but not to bad, out of all of them. The rest did there job and most really wanted to learn. I was glad to teach them what little I know. As far as my experience goes, I disagree with you whole heartedly.

It absolutely DOES help to maintain the integety and quailty of the tournaments.

Nothing is perfect though. Life has taught me that.

Glen

[ray koziatek]

1st derby i was in sodus last year you could cull if you cant get a 19 to 24 " fish to the boat before its played out get bigger line,ive released hundreds of fish in that size range and they all swim away very well this year we couldnt cull,other than niagra most had no reason too.every year the fishing changes .the rules are fine the observer is a little tuff but part of the game im happy with the way things are.ya catch what you catch if you do well you win if you suck that day well ....some one else wins...im fat and happy the way things are..if you want more poeple in the derbys advertise and word of moulth ..you cant keep everyone happy is a golden rule and when you try you will fail is a goldener rule you can take to the bank..........hey what about those bills?

[stan]

Ray being from California and fish alot of tournaments, your right on . There is just no way , you can keep all the anglers happy. Not telling you guys what todo. But set your rules and live with them. You will have a whole lot less headaches. People will be people, and they needs somthing to complain about. Just my 2 cents worth. Hey Matt get the boat ready and we will get into the tournament, what ever the rules are

Hey what about those 9ers

[Billy V]

I fully agree with you Glen. In my opinion, the observer is the ONLY way to guarantee the integrity of the Pro-Am's. And in my experience, finding an observer has absolutely NOT been a problem.

[Yankee Troller]

Hi everyone!

[waterlogged]

Two short points!!

One - how many times have you pre-fished right before a pro-am and got the fish "dialed in" and have a big blow on Thursday - and talk with everyone at Friday's Captains Meeting about how the fish aren't there any longer and need to begin Saturday morning with a search??

Two - For all the pro-ams I have fished I have always been 90% responsible for obtaining an observer. Usually three to four replies that we could pick from. By posting on this board alone we have always found a reliable competent observer and never had any problems.

That said we did have a problem once because there was a power outage in the observer's town and he didn't make it but the other team provided another team member as an observer per the rules - not because he/she was some drunk rummy!!

Also we went to the Niagara one year looking for an observer and they were all taken from the Olcott list. They made an announcement that observers were needed and anyone who wnated to observe should come to the podium. I went up and found this 19 year old kid who literally just walked in from Georgia to visit friends and needed cash and he did an outstanding job.

Lucky?? Maybe but it all worked out for us each year.

Clarke