Possible new record

[VMAXX]

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON Mar-22-06 AT 02:00AM (EST)[/font][p]

Plowboy I'm not mad and can agree to disagree,anyhow like the above post said it's not over yet the media says that their going to submit it for the record:

Jim the IGFA will consider a foul hooked fish it just cant be intentional

"The IGFA will consider certifying a scale after the fact.
It will disqualify any fish determined to have been intentionally foul-hooked.
A staff of three to five reviews all applications for record status. "We treat every record the same, whether it's a 1-pound bluegill or the all-tackle largemouth bass," he said.
An official decision on record status usually is reached one month after the application is received. "


Their turning in their scales,line,video tape and pics.

Also wearing(lol) certified scales around your neck would do you no good the IGFA will not recognize any weights that are taken on the water they must be taken on land..thats why they went back to the dock to weigh it

The funny part to all this is everyone joking around about I caught a world record also...These guys have pics,videotape and a long (recorded)history of catching big fish and yet all believe George Perrys record stands and he just ate his LOL
Bob Crupis 22.01 in my humble opinion is or was probably the verifiable world record


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vmaxx >)))^((">

[easy_13]

The more I read about this, I think there are only two possiblities here:

1. These guys did really catch a record, but were too stupid to know what to do with it

2. They know the fish isn't 25+, but are trying to "back door" their way into the record books by only turning in videotape, still photos and having it weighed on their own scales, which could be easily manipulated.

I'm leaning to No. 2. I just find it hard to believe that three guys who are this experienced at catching large fish (2 of the top 15 recorded LM of all-time; have supposedly caught this same fish multiple times) went to this much trouble (camping permit, trying to bribe other anglers) for an opportunity to catch this fish -- then don't know what to do with it when they have it in their possession.

[apb]

3) They figured there would be some contriversy over foul hooking the record bass, so they let it go hoping to catch it in the mouth next time. What kind of tackle endorsement could you get "this jig fould hooked a record and could foul hook one for you too!" I think if they had kept it, used a certified scale, and turned in the paper work, even if it was certified as the world record, there would always be the "it was foul hooked" associated with it. Sort of like the * that goes along with records that are broken by someone who is known to use steriods.

Andrew

[easy_13]

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON Mar-22-06 AT 11:58AM (EST)[/font][p]>3) They figured there would be
>some contriversy over foul hooking
>the record bass, so they
>let it go hoping to
>catch it in the mouth
>next time. What kind of
>tackle endorsement could you get
>"this jig fould hooked a
>record and could foul hook
>one for you too!" I
>think if they had kept
>it, used a certified scale,
>and turned in the paper
>work, even if it was
>certified as the world record,
>there would always be the
>"it was foul hooked" associated
>with it. Sort of like
>the * that goes along
>with records that are broken
>by someone who is known
>to use steriods.
>
>Andrew

Like I said earlier, the IGFA does not disqualify foul-hooked fish unless they are INTENTIONALLY foul-hooked.

Foul-hooked world record > no world record > tainted world record

These guys are trophy hunters. They know every inch of the IGFA rule book, IMO. I think this whole thing is a just a way to get around having the fish measured and weighed on certified scales.

[trentonc2000]

The whole thing was filmed on a set in a secret Air Force base in New Mexico.

What a hog!!

[jrbass]

They snagged this fish. Paid for it's location. It's almost as bad as Jimmy Houston's trick a couple of years ago. they should not get the title.

[Danny]

got a question, am I the only one to think WOW that big a fish is out there?


OK, so it doesn't qualify for a world record bass on all tackle, but still if the weight proves out to be the truth, isn't it something that has to be at least acknowledged??

People have said George Perry's record would not be broken because a bass could not get that big... here it is.. or supposedly here it is.

I agree, they should not get the record if it is true they bribed a guy to quit fishing, they snuck around the rules to start fishing early, etc.. etc... but the fact is still, here is a 25 lb fish. If the fish were truly 25 pounds, it should still be recognized as the biggest bass ever recorded.

I just wish KY had the possiblility to produce one of these.

Danny

[dew32202]

WE do have a chance but she will be brown DW

[Danny]

Michael Wilbom was saluting the anglers morality at letting the fish go as opposed to killing it and cashing in for over a million bucks. Fortunately,, Tony Kornheiser knew a little of the facts... shame they did not really know the controversy.

Anyway, fishing is becoming more and more main stream.

Danny

[Bigboy]

Here's a hint !!!!!
Correct me if I'm wrong but a Largemouth weighing in at 25lbs should have a mouth big enough to fit 3 fists into. I have seen video of Bill Dance put 2 fists side by side into a 15lb bass. And that is the classic camera angle,(arm extended towards camera) for maximum size appearance. Just ask any professional photographer.
Just my 2 cents....

Keep it Fun & Keep it Safe

Bigboy

[Fishin_4_Fun]

?

---------------------------
I'd rather be catchin! :7

[spinnerbaitguy]

I guess I'm old school and while I have hoped I'd live long enough to see a world record LMB caught , at the same time I hate to see it fall .However the truth seems to be ,to me , that we have more, or at least as much, validation on this fish than old George's 1932 standing record .I don't think, or maybe I don't want to think that these guys are trying to backdoor their way into the books .Psychologists tell us we judge people by what we think we would do in the same situation .It's always easy to scrutinize and even "villianize" the things which are new or different .I guess we're all guilty of it at different times , but if Mac Weakley legitimately caught it and it meets the IGFA requirements , it seems to me we have to give credit where it's due .The mainstream media will do their part in ripping them apart,like they do with everything else that happens because it sells "tickets" and makes sure there will be another article in another issue .They appeal to our bloodthirst in wanting to see people under the gun .If this statement isn't true , then someone please explain the successes of Current Affair,20-20,Jerry Springer and other forms of "journalism" of this type .I agree we need balanced viewpoints , but to rip something apart to make a buck is a rough way to go .If this record is embraced by the IGFA, I hope we can rejoice for the accomplishment and not grumble over it for years to come .I am reminded of the "beating" that David Hayes must have taken for a long time after the 1955 smallmouth was pitched out by some apparently untrue accusations .It's supposed to be innocent until proven guilty not the other way around .Just my opinion .Thanks for your time .