# Northern Open at Erie tainted...



## lordofthepunks

This story just broke and Im sort of ticked off at what Im hearing.

Nate Wellman, an elite series angler won the event but was accused by his co-angler of attempting to buy fish from him on the final day of the tournament. 

According to sources, Wellman repeatedly offered his co-angler $1,000 to $3,000 for the 4lbers the co-angler had boated earlier in the day. Also offering to run away from other boaters out to open water so they would not see an exchange.

Wellman, of course, claims he was only kidding and that stress was the main factor for the ill advised "jokes"

B.A.S.S. punishment? $2500 fine and 1 year probation!

WTF. Iaconelli gets disqualified from the classic for a tantrum, swindle gets disqualified for running on plane close to another angler and this guy gets a fine that isnt even 10% of his winnings.


just my opinion but the least of his punishments should have been a dq on the final day and a 12th place finish. the worst should consist of a full dq and pulling his elite series card. 

whos to know if he didnt pull this crap on day one and day two and had a seller?

joke or not, very shady.


----------



## russ9054

Wow,very shady. Those were offers disguised as jokes. Should of been dq'ed.


----------



## FISHIN216

Iaconelli throwing a tantrum...no way lol...but seriously I'm not surprised...there is cheating in all levels of every sport

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## firstflight111

wow thats sad to hear


----------



## young-gun21

Regardless of how BASS handles the situation right now, this kid is going to have a hell of a time trying to kick this incident. He cost himself waaaay more than 1st place money in the long run. 

Iaconelli is the AOY/Classic Champ that freaked out. Nate Wellman is...........the shady guy that offered money for fish. Poor idea on his part...humor or not.

Sent from my HTC Evo


----------



## CARP 104

I just read this a little bit ago and I completely lost all respect I had for Wellman. Who knows if he hasn't done similar things in the past when he won chesapeake bay or any other tournament. It's a complete shame he would even consider saying something like this and I agree the punishment does not fit the crime based on how others have been punished in the past for what should be considered 'lesser' violations.


----------



## Nipididdee

I got to put a little faith in Trip Weldon and official's here.

No argument that Wellman has tarnished his accomplishments and likely won't get out from underneath the scrutiny...

I figure BASS investigated the other days co's and possibly even previous co's from his other wins. I'm sure time will tell if otherwise.

Appears to me official's determined indeed it was completely said in jest and a one time deal... 



> &#8220;Our system of tournament angling, pairing a professional angler with a co-angler or even another professional, has been tried and tested for decades,&#8217;&#8217; said Trip Weldon, B.A.S.S. tournament director. &#8220;It&#8217;s a great system, as this instance proves. Our co-angler did the right thing by reporting it. He is to be commended. At this level, there isn&#8217;t room for questions on the integrity of our anglers. And there certainly isn&#8217;t room for suggestions or jokes that could do anything to break down that integrity. That is why this action was taken.&#8221;


Translation- we had a rule to cover even a joke, although we'd wish the co angler had laughed a little, we still have to praise him for being anal retentive and litteral in his communications. Wellman is a ding dong for putting himself in that position and we had to do something despite being an obvious joke.

What will be more interesting to me in this day and age of social media is how BASS might handle this rule:


> MEDIA COMMENTS, PUBLIC ATTACKS
> The favorable public reputation of BASS as a sanctioning organization in the sport of fishing, the integrity of its officials, and the reputation of its media properties are valuable assets and tangible benefits for BASS. Accordingly, it is an obligation of competitors to refrain from comments to the news media that unreasonably attack or disparage the integrity of tournaments, tournament officials, sponsors, fellow members, fellow anglers or the BASS organization. Competitors are encouraged to express themselves and have the right to question the rules officials. Responsible expressions of legitimate disagreement with BASS policies are encouraged, as opposed to attacks upon the integrity of the rules or officials. However, public comments that an angler knows, or should reasonably know, will harm the reputation of BASS, BASS officials or sponsors, shall be considered conduct unbecoming a
> professional and will result in disciplinary action.


All the comments after this incident, even here, contain names to faces to their voiced opinions. Very enforceable if crosses the line.

Loose-loose for the bass world... we are our own worst enemies.

nip


----------



## Dinger

Wow...Good points here, but in my opinion if they had enough proof to fine him they had enough proof to DQ him. Seems pretty black and white to me and certainly a black eye on the face of B.A.S.S. no matter what.

Ding <----shaking his head


----------



## Scum_Frog

I def agree with dinger.....enough to fine enough to DQ for sure....no one can just be honest anymore barely.....very few left out there who is. Its crazy....

Any other tourny's wellman fishes in....he will be looked at as a cheater if he places in any of them. Dudes a tool.


----------



## jugmaster

i can solve this problem, just do away with co-anglers and there are no problems.


----------



## mpd5094

He should've been DQ'd! I don't know how anyone on the tour can trust him again. Very sad to hear from one of the finest tours around!


----------



## Red1

FISHIN216 said:


> Iaconelli throwing a tantrum...no way lol...but seriously I'm not surprised...there is cheating in all levels of every sport
> 
> Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


I have allways thought that when there is money and people envolved there is a good chance someone will try and cheat.


----------



## Shortdrift

Your mail box is full.


----------



## Nipididdee

My signature says it all shorty 

I've joked around about man sex with a co. from N.Carolina- glad he didn't take it seriously...hope he wasn't uncomfortable 

I hope he sees this lolololol


----------



## baby bass

DQ THE GUY WHO CAN TRUST HIM AFTER HE SAID HE WAS JOKING ,THATS NOTHING TO JOKE ABOUT.WHO COULD EVER TRUST HIM AGAIN.HE SHOULD DO THE RIGHT THING AND DQ HIMSELF. THATS MY THOUGHTS ON THE SUBJECT.


----------



## lang99

i give props to the co-angler for coming forward with this info. i also believe he should of been dq. They should of made an example of him.


----------



## Cull'in

Interesting stuff.

Joking is saying, "Man, I'd give a thousand bucks to catch a four pounder right now."
Not joking is saying you'd give a thousand or more for a guys fish *AND* talk about running to open water where you wouldn't be seen!

I trust B.A.S.S.'s decision without knowing every detail but on the surface it sounds pretty disturbing. I guess in the end since nothing illegal actually transpired it was Wellman's word against the co as far as it being a joke or not. Misinterpretation if you will.

The co-angler couldn't have thought it was to funny since he was so compelled to bring it to attention.


----------



## fishingredhawk

I will be interested to see if more comes out of this issue. Crazy.


----------



## Harbor Hunter

I know had I been either a boater,or a co in this event,I would be highly upset.Wellman is taking an absolute pounding on many websites right now,and deservedly so.The one thing that nearly everybody seems to be missing when he said he was only joking around,is the fact that he just didn't offer(joke)to buy the co's fish once,but FOUR times throughout the day.Add to the fact that he also suggested that they would drive out away from the view of other guys to transfer the fish to his side of the livewell,and he mentioned that his dad always carried a grand or two on him and would "pay him off" at the weigh-in.Does this sound like someone who was "just joking around",or does it sound like someone who had a pre-determined plan? Without question one has to wonder if his day one and two co's did take him up on his offer,do you think if they did,they would admit it? Of course they wouldn't,because of the fear of a lifetime ban.The open he won at Chesapeak Bay,did he offer co's the same deal there too? A lot of people may not realize that the big pros,the ones that fish the elite series,use the opens to qualify for the Classic too,just like regular guys.Can you imagine after all the travel and expenses all year long a guy like Wellman gets to go to the classic next year,and they may not,talk about p'od! I have always had the utmost respect for BASS,but after the slap on the wrist they gave Wellman,I'm not sure I still hold them in the highest regard anymore.Clearly in my opinion Wellman not only should've been dq'ed at Sandusky,but he should also be banned for life from BASS.


----------



## Barney

I have seen postings here and at other sites where the co-angler is quoted as saying Wellman offered 4 times, and they would drive out to the middle of the lake, and his dad always carried $3000 and would pay him off at the ramp...
What site had the interview with the co-angler?
I would like to read about this from that point of view. All I have seen is the B.A.S.S. article where they give basically no details; and these blog posts.


----------



## lordofthepunks

Barney said:


> I have seen postings here and at other sites where the co-angler is quoted as saying Wellman offered 4 times, and they would drive out to the middle of the lake, and his dad always carried $3000 and would pay him off at the ramp...
> What site had the interview with the co-angler?
> I would like to read about this from that point of view. All I have seen is the B.A.S.S. article where they give basically no details; and these blog posts.


the co-angler actually posted on another forum the details which is exactly what everyone is referring too. there was a link to his comment on another forum but im not going to link it here. 

so far, nobody has interviewed the co angler. from everything ive gathered myself and putting the pieces together, it seems that b.a.s.s. biggest hang up is that the guy signed the weigh in slip and didnt report it untill after the checks were handed out. according to b.a.s.s. rules, any complaints have to be filed in writing immidiately following the tournament. that didnt happen here. 


i agree though, in my opinion, he should have been dqd and he prob would have if the co would have reported this from the start. for awhile i thought something might change but the farther we get from it, the less likely i think there will be a change in the rulling. 


i feel bad for the guy that finished 2nd, he should be heading to the classic.


----------



## lordofthepunks

apparently, wellman has been banned from all FLW competitions for the next year. seems as though they have heard the voices and responded.


----------



## Nipididdee

BASS yanked all their comments from all webpages....

Wellman to speak soon...

When does the bass mafia get involved?

Social media at it's best. Bass2.0

Politicians and bass anglers should not be allowed computer access  

Black eyes galore


----------



## Barney

Hey Punk
You say the guy signed the weigh in slip so the report was actually made after the weigh-in was over. Well didn't Skeet find the 6th fish in the well while cleaning up the boat? He reported to Trip a half hour after the weigh-in was complete. Result: DQ


----------



## fredg53

What does the coangler have to lose Wellman should be banned or investigated or probation just sad to have this drama in fishing honnor rules Wellman u have been and are a joke 

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## lordofthepunks

Barney said:


> Hey Punk
> You say the guy signed the weigh in slip so the report was actually made after the weigh-in was over. Well didn't Skeet find the 6th fish in the well while cleaning up the boat? He reported to Trip a half hour after the weigh-in was complete. Result: DQ


we dont technically have to "sign" a slip. we get what looks like a recipt that has our weights on it. flw does a signing type deal. when i was thinking back, i couldnt remember if we had to sign those weight receipts or not. 

i got clarification and we dont sign them. for whatever reason, i couldnt remember if signed them or not.


but yeah, i agree, that skeet reese deal is another good example of how the rules have always been adhered to strictly. im still having trouble with this one. i cant figure out how they came to the decision they made.

the delayed mention of the problem was only a speculation. i cant really speak for them but its the only thing ive been able to come up with as to why he didnt get dqd.


----------



## Harbor Hunter

There's a link on Bassmaster Opens in the response area of the Wellman story.The co-angler relates the story of what was said in the boat on day three.He said that he respects Wellman(why?)but if he didn't come forward and tell the truth he wouldn't be able to look himself in the mirror.He clearly states that Wellman offered him between $1000.00-$3000.00 for his fish.He said that Wellman was clearly nervous that his weight wasn't going to be enough to get him into the Classic.He also said that Wellman offered him the money four different times throughout the day,and suggested that they could drive out into an area of the lake where nobody could see them exchange the fish.He also stated that Wellman said that his father always carried the said amounts on him,and he would be present after the weigh-in to settle the deal.Only somebody who doesn't fish major TX's could look at this as not so much of a big deal.Wellman just ripped off $50.000 from BASS from this event,and stands to make nothing less than $10.000 at the Classic,in addition to stealing the spot at the Classic from a very deserving Jared Rhode.If Wellman is allowed to go to the Classic,I will end my lifetime affliation with BASS,I feel by BASS not stepping up and placing a lifetime ban on Wellman is a slap in the face of every tournament angler at all levels who compete within the rules.FLW I give you props,you had the integrity to ban this cheater the rest of 2011,and the entire 2012 season.I just can't understand how after Skeet Reese admitted that he accidentally had a sixth bass in his livewell was dq'ed,Swindle was dq'ed for driving too fast past another angler,Ike was dq'ed,and KVD was dq'ed for allowing his co to run the main motor while he was spotting fish from the bow,but yet Wellman tries to buy his co's fish,and he gets probation,and is still allowed to compete at the Classic.Shame on you BASS!


----------



## Nipididdee

Everytime we have ever issued penalties from short fish up to DQ's/banning this kind of chatter resonates. 

Suddenly, everyone becomes directors and no longer are anglers.

Not only that, but somehow everyone knows more than what they think- or knows someone that was there "close to it"- or compares apples to oranges.

The Wellman incident is the epitome of misinformation. The social web 2.0 citations are no more than unconfirmed chatter self contextualized to fit each person's read.

I often despise the mere suggestions that "angler committees" are formed or a selection of the base makes decisions. They can't! That is what the organization is expected to do for them, why rules are in place and how being the dictator/director who makes the formal calls can suck.

Anglers play politics, think with emotions and fail to see the forest through all the trees when making judgements. They are the worst rule making group for an organization. Bless Trip Weldon.

Bottom line- it always gets beat to death and the UGLY side of fishing is perceived from the masses of laypeople of tournament fishing. We look like jokes.

I'm not arguing one way or the other for Wellman, but I do have faith in both major organizations - BASS and FLW.

There are reasons for their decisions that we all may very well never know- and honestly as anglers...we shouldn't- that is both organizations (BASS/FLW) business decisions.

Dealing with some of what cry foul bassers and by the book nit pickers can throw at you- both organizations do a spectacular job of keeping the peace, playing fair and staying in the black for us all.

nip


----------



## lordofthepunks

Nipididdee said:


> Everytime we have ever issued penalties from short fish up to DQ's/banning this kind of chatter resonates.
> 
> Suddenly, everyone becomes directors and no longer are anglers.
> 
> Not only that, but somehow everyone knows more than what they think- or knows someone that was there "close to it"- or compares apples to oranges.
> 
> The Wellman incident is the epitome of misinformation. The social web 2.0 citations are no more than unconfirmed chatter self contextualized to fit each person's read.
> 
> I often despise the mere suggestions that "angler committees" are formed or a selection of the base makes decisions. They can't! That is what the organization is expected to do for them, why rules are in place and how being the dictator/director who makes the formal calls can suck.
> 
> Anglers play politics, think with emotions and fail to see the forest through all the trees when making judgements. They are the worst rule making group for an organization. Bless Trip Weldon.
> 
> Bottom line- it always gets beat to death and the UGLY side of fishing is perceived from the masses of laypeople of tournament fishing. We look like jokes.
> 
> I'm not arguing one way or the other for Wellman, but I do have faith in both major organizations - BASS and FLW.
> 
> There are reasons for their decisions that we all may very well never know- and honestly as anglers...we shouldn't- that is both organizations (BASS/FLW) business decisions.
> 
> Dealing with some of what cry foul bassers and by the book nit pickers can throw at you- both organizations do a spectacular job of keeping the peace, playing fair and staying in the black for us all.
> 
> nip


im curious at what you view as "misinformation"? the co-angler has made a quote describing in detail what occured that day. wellman admitted to the allegations and FLW banned him for one year based on there own investigation that included interviewing both parties.

this is all factual information. in fact, i have yet to see a report or information that turned out to be false or unsubstantiated.

i am also curious, based on the facts that have been presented, you being a tournament director, what decision would you have made based on what you know?

i see a track record for b.a.s.s. that has shown zero tolerance for any rule breakage, most times involving issues that had no impact and no potential for an impact on the outcome of the tournament. yet we have an issue here where a participant suggested multiple times to his co angler to cheat for him and the punishment was the lightest punishment i have ever seen dished out by the organization. 

even if, in the best case scenario, he was joking, its still in violation of the rule that says you cannot promote cheating to another angler.

at any rate, i cant stop reading the stuff about wellman, i keep expecting b.a.s.s. to come out and say that they are changing the ruling.

also just read a quote from ray scott that suggested that there be a polygraph administered. 

i dont get it, i reckon its a good thing that im not a tournament director.


----------



## PapawSmith

lordofthepunks said:


> im curious at what you view as "misinformation"? the co-angler has made a quote describing in detail what occured that day. wellman admitted to the allegations and FLW banned him for one year based on there own investigation that included interviewing both parties.
> this is all factual information. in fact, i have yet to see a report or information that turned out to be false or unsubstantiated..


The only "factual information" is that the Co-angler said he was offered money for fish and the Pro said he was only joking. There are no "facts" that establish the Pro was actually trying to cheat, only an allegation. If we are all automatically assumed guilty based on anothers allegation then we are all doomed. The pro admitted to the comment, and even discussion, and was penalized for it at a level based on his admission. They did not, and rightfully so IMO, penalize him based on the Co-anglers allegation. Had the Co made his case to the officials immediately after exiting the boat all of this would have probably been handled differently. I don't know when BASS first became aware of the allegation but my understanding is that the first comments the Co made about this was on a blog site, is that correct? If so, that is where the entire issue becomes muddied. BASS was left in a difficult situation here with the way this issue presented itself.


----------



## Nipididdee

> i am also curious, based on the facts that have been presented, you being a tournament director, what decision would you have made based on what you know?


Really... after my other presented insights 

A better question for all is what would you do/how would you feel if you were the angler the allegation is waged against.

The only facts known were presented by the two who were there and then onto BASS. 

The internet is a poor source of information, so to are witnesses to a crime. It always changes or evolves into something different.

My ruling with the info I have- nada, except smile. 

I've had co's in my boat that shouldn't be allowed to walk in society, little lone be a witness to an allegation.


----------



## lordofthepunks

PapawSmith said:


> The only "factual information" is that the Co-angler said he was offered money for fish and the Pro said he was only joking. There are no "facts" that establish the Pro was actually trying to cheat, only an allegation. If we are all automatically assumed guilty based on anothers allegation then we are all doomed. The pro admitted to the comment, and even discussion, and was penalized for it at a level based on his admission. They did not, and rightfully so IMO, penalize him based on the Co-anglers allegation. Had the Co made his case to the officials immediately after exiting the boat all of this would have probably been handled differently. I don't know when BASS first became aware of the allegation but my understanding is that the first comments the Co made about this was on a blog site, is that correct? If so, that is where the entire issue becomes muddied. BASS was left in a difficult situation here with the way this issue presented itself.


whats the point of having a co-angler system if what they say means nothing?

if penalties cannot be levied based on allegations then the co-angler system of keeping everything legit is completely worthless.

in this case, it wasnt only allegations, the pro admitted to the discussion, the discussion was illegal, black and white. in my eyes, it is irrelevant that he says he was joking.


if the pro straight up said "hell no, i didnt say anything like that" then i would agree with you but thats not what happened


----------



## lordofthepunks

Nipididdee said:


> Really... after my other presented insights
> 
> A better question for all is what would you do/how would you feel if you were the angler the allegation is waged against.
> 
> The only facts known were presented by the two who were there and then onto BASS.
> 
> The internet is a poor source of information, so to are witnesses to a crime. It always changes or evolves into something different.
> 
> My ruling with the info I have- nada, except smile.
> 
> I've had co's in my boat that shouldn't be allowed to walk in society, little lone be a witness to an allegation.


to your question. i would not be in that position because i would never attempt to cheat. if the allegation was made that was purely a false accusation then i would demand a polygraph test for myself and the co-angler.



again, if you cant make a ruling on this, then what is the point of having the pro-co policing system if what they say is merely an allegation and can never be used against the other to dq?


----------



## Harbor Hunter

Here's one way to look at it for those of you that say it's one guy's word versus another.

Example One: The co-angler,he's not going to win the TX,he isn't going to make much,if any money from this TX,he's not going anywhere,except for the last event at Oneida.

Example Two: Wellman,he wins the TX,he wins $50.000,he gets to go to the Classic.

Compare the two,who would be more inclined to lie? Who has more to benefit from telling a lie?

Nip,maybe you do still have a few folks siding with you on this,but since you like to hear things direct from other's mouth's,go to bassfan and read the words of other competitors regarding this issue.here's a short list of interviews you may want to check out.
1.Greg Hackney
2.Brent Chapman
3.Kevin Short
4.Scott Rook
5.Matt Herren
6.Stephen Browning
7.Ish Monroe
8.John Crews
9.Jerry McKinnis
Even Ray Scott wants a polygraph done! 
As a TX director,I'm sure that you have heard these names,to a man they all feel that Wellman should've been dq'ed,if not worse.Just the fact that Wellman admitted saying what he said regardless of whether it was a joke or not,to most directors would be grounds for disqualification.Hackney praised the FLW,just as I did,for stepping up and banning Wellman.If a tournament director can't distinguish which party is wrong in a dispute over the rules,or can't tell who is telling the truth,and who isn't,then maybe it's time to turn the reins over to someone who can.A lot of us have invested thousands upon thousands of dollars into TX angling,not to mention being away from home for most of the summer,and we don't want cheaters among our ranks.Sorry to disagree with you,just my opinion.


----------



## PapawSmith

Harbor Hunter said:


> Here's one way to look at it for those of you that say it's one guy's word versus another.
> 
> Example One: The co-angler,he's not going to win the TX,he isn't going to make much,if any money from this TX,he's not going anywhere,except for the last event at Oneida.
> Example Two: Wellman,he wins the TX,he wins $50.000,he gets to go to the Classic.
> Compare the two,who would be more inclined to lie? Who has more to benefit from telling a lie?


I'd say the the pissed off Co-angler. He is already angry because he didn't cash now the pro is rubbing it in his face with a "I'll buy your fish, they're doing you no good" blast. He figures that is not too funny and later, after he sees the Pro get a $50,000 check, he decides to make a little more of it and tosses the comment out on a blog site. After it grows legs, really fast, he now has to embellish his story or back off all together.
I know that is not how it went but if we are being hypothetical, this version is just as valid. I believe that the biggest factor to this entire unfortunate situation is the fact that the CO-angler waited too long before he spoke. I have no sympathy for a cheater at any level. I just say that in this situation BASS can only rightfully punish him commensurate with an off handed joke about an unspeakable subject in a tournament setting. That is all they can verify occurred.


----------



## lordofthepunks

PapawSmith said:


> I'd say the the pissed off Co-angler. He is already angry because he didn't cash now the pro is rubbing it in his face with a "I'll buy your fish, they're doing you no good" blast. He figures that is not too funny and later, after he sees the Pro get a $50,000 check, he decides to make a little more of it and tosses the comment out on a blog site. After it grows legs, really fast, he now has to embellish his story or back off all together.
> I know that is not how it went but if we are being hypothetical, this version is just as valid. I believe that the biggest factor to this entire unfortunate situation is the fact that the CO-angler waited too long before he spoke. I have no sympathy for a cheater at any level. I just say that in this situation BASS can only rightfully punish him commensurate with an off handed joke about an unspeakable subject in a tournament setting. That is all they can verify occurred.


maybe that makes sense if the co-angler wasnt in contension to win as well.

he ended up finishing 7th and had his limit before wellman had a single fish in the box, so that theory is complete hogwash.

he also told bass officials about the incident before he talked about in on the internet.


----------



## fredg53

Why would Wellman even attempt to make that soo called joke period 

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## Nipididdee

Trust me Harbor, I know how to "remove enemies" from the game...and have done so. From catching dirtballs to squashing any dock talk.

I also know how to protect anglers, the game and provide a positive atmosphere. 

Many of the comments from the anglers you referenced are doing just that with their intentions...not sure what you are reading further.

Just as everyone plays, remember it could always be you in the hot seat. 

Don't think for a second otherwise regardless of how straight shooting you are self perceived, especially with this kinda scenerio that played out.

Wellman possibly thought the same....

No further insights for me here.

nip


----------



## Harbor Hunter

No arguements with you at all.Don't you really think that for all parties involved,including BASS it would just clear things up if Wellman would just do a polygraph? My major sticking point is not just conjecture,I read the co-anglers statement,and I also read Wellman's.Never once in Wellman's statement did he deny any of the accusations,in fact he did admit saying just what the co said he did,although Wellman said it was in jest.As far as me ever being in the hot seat in a TX,I've been there a few times,for petty stuff such as being a minute or two late getting back to the weigh-in,or one time I had started my main motor without having my vest on(stupid me),but I guarantee you I'll never have any kind of an attempt at cheating added to this list.I commend you if you've laid down the law in your circuit as a director,many don't.The very last TX I was at,and it was a pretty fair sized event,the director didn't even bother with doing a livewell check in the morning before blast off,not good.


----------



## senkothrower

http://bassfan.com/news_article.asp?id=4062

Didn't realize the "joking" extended all the way to the weighin


----------



## bman

This is so tough....with the current format (co-anglers) and rules it's almost unfair either way. no one wins. If BASS took a hard stance against Wellman, you can bet a pro would be blackmailed at some point in the future under similar circumstances. And that too would be wrong.

If everything that the coangler said was true and accurately represented, then Wellman deserved a big fat DQ. However, no one will ever know what tone he used, the context of his statements, etc....only those two know. I guess it needs to be black and white...you just don't even say anything like that during a tx period. If they are going to keep the coangler format, they need to make it black and white. Wellman admitted to making those statements.....so I guess from a black and white perspective he broke a serious rule and should be DQ'd.

The only way to fix this going forward is to do what someone else already stated - eliminate the co-anglers. Either go team format or solo with a marshall on the boat. Maybe even just simply "no more co-angler."

I don't know enough about pro bass fishing to understand the history of the co-angler though, truth be told. Don't the FLW walleye guys fish as teams? How did the pro bass tx format become pro/co-angler? Perhaps this was a way to provide grass roots support and opportunities to amatuers?


----------



## jugmaster

i still think you're right. without co-anglers there is no dispute.


----------



## spfldbassguy

Holy Bat Poop Bat Man,I've just read through this thread and I must say that he shoulda been banned for life from FLW and B.A.S.S..I don't care if he was joking or not,he broke the rules plain and simple. Anything even remotely considered cheating by an angler should be dealt with in the harshest manner possible. I'd make both of them take the Polygraph as quick as possible. That to me would go along way in helping clear this all up. The co angler shoulda put a stop to it after the first time Wellman "joked" around about buying his fish. I would've told him that if he said anything close to that one more time I was gonna turn him into the officials as soon as we got back. I bet he would've shut his mouth the rest of the day. If we can't have honor while competeing in sports then we shouldn't be competeing in the first place. I have a zero tolerance policy for anyone who tries to or actually does cheat while competeing.


----------



## dinkcatcher

The co angler actually told bass that he wanted to pay for both his and wellmans polygraph. Apparently they didn't feel it was necessary. 


_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors._


----------



## PapawSmith

dinkcatcher said:


> The co angler actually told bass that he wanted to pay for both his and wellmans polygraph. Apparently they didn't feel it was necessary.
> _OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors._


Many people put way too much stock in Polygraph tests. They are not some type of magical tell all machine. While they certainly have their uses, they also have their limitations. They can assist in determining if an event or action took place, but they can not decipher the "intent" within a specific comment framed within a discussion. The fact that Wellman does not dispute the "conversation", only the "intent" a polygraph is most likely useless in this situation. This is a very difficult situation for the Officials that would have probably been handled differently had the Co spoke up immediately upon exiting the boat.
And LOP, that was not a "theory" just an example of how there can be many different motivations for an individual to make an accusation. Totally fictitious, not what I believe happened at all. You seem to have taken the Co's version as pure and total "fact" and are angered that the BASS officials have not. I'm just saying that it is not that easy for them they HAVE to consider both parties interests. I'm not saying that things did not happen as the Co claimed, just saying that BASS is obligated to exercise caution when handing out a penalty in this situation when the claim of a violation was presented to them in the manner that it was.


----------



## Harbor Hunter

It's very difficult to agree with the decision of BASS officials considering that the KLBA has banned him,the FLW has banned him,and now the PAA has also banned him for the remainder of this year,and all of 2012.All these organizations realized what was said(and admitted to),is plenty enough to ban Wellman,how can BASS not follow suit,especially considering the rules were broken in one of their own events? To me personally,it wouldn't have mattered if the co came forth with this information a week after the event occured,the fact remains that Wellman offered to buy his co's fish to enhance his own total weight-period.Yes,a polygraph would definitely provide all the facts needed:Question "Mr.Wellman did you offer to buy your co's fish,jokingly,or otherwise"? Yes sir,I did,but I was only joking with him-banned! You see Mr.Smith in tournament competition,as in all sports,even kidding around about cheating is intolerable.Would you like to be Jared Rhode about right now? He finished second to Wellman,Jared won't be competing in the upcoming Bassmaster Classic,Wellman will be.Want to ask Jared if he thinks intent means anything?


----------



## baby bass

i agree 100% on the subect.should have been a lie dector test to clear up the matter.if i was nate and i was not guilty of any wrong doing i would demand a lie dector test.nate must be guilty because he has not ask for one.he is sitting back so he can fish the classic,thats all he cares about.:S:S:S:S


----------



## fishingredhawk

Wellman will not be fishing the Classic. Here is the story:

http://www.bassmaster.com/news/wellman-not-fishing-classic


----------



## Harbor Hunter

Yep,I read that earlier today.Although I still think Wellman should've been banned from BASS for the entire 2012 season,like he is from the FLW and PAA,I will tip my hat to BASS,at least they finally did something.


----------



## Bad Bub

I don't think a lie detector test is going to prove anything different.... wellman never denied offering money for the fish. The intent really doesn't matter as far as BASS is concerned.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


----------



## lordofthepunks

PapawSmith said:


> Many people put way too much stock in Polygraph tests. They are not some type of magical tell all machine. While they certainly have their uses, they also have their limitations. They can assist in determining if an event or action took place, but they can not decipher the "intent" within a specific comment framed within a discussion. The fact that Wellman does not dispute the "conversation", only the "intent" a polygraph is most likely useless in this situation. This is a very difficult situation for the Officials that would have probably been handled differently had the Co spoke up immediately upon exiting the boat.
> And LOP, that was not a "theory" just an example of how there can be many different motivations for an individual to make an accusation. Totally fictitious, not what I believe happened at all. You seem to have taken the Co's version as pure and total "fact" and are angered that the BASS officials have not. I'm just saying that it is not that easy for them they HAVE to consider both parties interests. I'm not saying that things did not happen as the Co claimed, just saying that BASS is obligated to exercise caution when handing out a penalty in this situation when the claim of a violation was presented to them in the manner that it was.



i read both sides of the story and made my judgements based on the facts as i know them. the same way FLW did, the same way PAA did and the same way 99% of every body who read all the facts did.

judgements have to be made, sometimes you have to use common sense to come to a conclusion and just because there are certain gaps that can never be known does not mean you can not come to a logical conclusion based off of what you know.

that hypothetical story you told could have certainly happened but common sense would tell you that the truth would come out. wellman would be telling his side of the story, saying that it was all b.s. and that he would offer to take a polygraph, and be screaming at the top of his lungs to anyone who would listen.


none of that happened, the co anglers story came out, wellman admitted to making the comments, there are many known details in between that came out as well and wellmans only excuse was to say he was joking. if you cant come to the conclusion that he intended to buy the fish for real then thats your problem


if you leave a sandwich on your table, leave the room, return to find it gone and a bunch of maynaise on your dogs face, then obviously, the dog ate the sandwich. you didnt see it happen for yourself so you may never know what really happened? uhhhh, the dog ate the sandwich, pretty easy to make that assumption.


again, if wellman would have came out and said "hell no, he is lying, i didnt do that, give me a poly" or even "THIS IS B.S., I WAS SCREWING AROUND, I NEVER MEANT IT, I SWEAR TO GOD, I WILL DO WHATEVER I CAN TO CLEAR MY NAME, GIVE ME A POLY'' then maybe i would agree with you but that stuff never happened. what came out is what was presented and i choose to form an opinion from what i know rather then sit on the convenience fence of "we dont know what really happened out there".


----------



## Harbor Hunter

If what is coming from BASS is true that both BASS and Wellman mutually agreed that he is banned from the next Northern Open,which in turn won't allow him to compete in the Bassmasters Classic,isn't that alone an admission of guilt from Wellman? Would any of you on here agree to this if you weren't guilty? A lot of people seem to be stuck on the rules infraction thing that BASS goes by,you know,the one about only having a half-hour to protest something after weigh-in.In no way does that include cheating.The co-angler admitted that he was afraid to come forward with the things said that day,props to him for finding the nerve to do the right thing.Right at that point if Wellman was innocent he would've said so,but he didn't,he admitted to saying those things.What more do you need?


----------



## jpbasspro

The "man" has spoken... Please read what I'd refer to as Ray Scott's closing remarks on this issue!!



http://www.bassfan.com/rayscott_article.asp?ID=73


----------



## WLAngler

Ban Nate Wellman!


----------



## dwmikemx

WLAngler said:


> Ban Nate Wellman!


You can bet Ray Scott would have banned him for life.


----------

