# State record largemouth?



## Ohio Ice (Feb 8, 2009)

Hey Guy's,

My brother caught this largemouth on Sunday in a farm pond. He caught it on a minnow and bobber. He measured the fish and said it was 27 inches. I need to ask him how he measured it. He took the photo and released the fish. I checked the state record on odnr and it is 25 1/16. It will kill him if it was a state record. He said he thought it was around 12 pounds. His bigest ever is 8lbs. I think there is a way to take a photo and tell the dimensions and average the weight out. Anyone familiar with this?

He has another photo with his friend holding it. I will get it from him and post.

anyway's it's a nice one and we know where he lives.


----------



## robertj298 (Feb 23, 2009)

Hard to tell from that photo how big it is. Look how far in front of his body he is holding it and how much bigger his hand he is holding it looks than his other hand


----------



## Harbor Hunter (Aug 19, 2007)

The state record is over 13lbs.It's impossible to tell the weight of that bass in the pic,to me it doesn't look like it would beat the record fish,but again it's hard to tell from the pic.On a related note,not meaning any disrespect towards the guy that caught this bass,or any other potential record fish,but I don't see how the ODNR can consider any fish regardless of whatever specie it may be,a state record if it is caught from private waters.The current state record bass was caught from a private farm pond.For any fish to be considered as a state record,it should have to be caught from water that anybody can fish,if it's a so-called public record,then it should have to come from public waters.Just my thought,disagree if you will.


----------



## twistertail (Apr 10, 2004)

WOW!! Nice fish, no matter where it came from!! I thought a state record did have to come from public water?? I know that the record large mouth came from a private pond but I thought they changed it to that now it does have to come from public water?


----------



## Mushijobah (May 4, 2004)

Helluva fish right there.

On twistertail's comment....that's interesting. Why wouldn't the record be reset if the new rules state that it mustn't be a private pond?


----------



## Gottagofishn (Nov 18, 2009)

Beautiful fish.....Way to start the year!


----------



## GABO (Apr 4, 2008)

nice fish. 

why would the state limit it to public water when i bet most of the water in ohio is private. take out your large navagitable rivers and public lakes and all that other water is private. that makes no sense, but then again you are talking about the state of ohio.

GABO


----------



## nitefisher (Jul 8, 2009)

The only water that is ineligible for a state record fish is a pay lake. All state record fish must be examined by a odnr fisheries biologist, must be weighed on state certified scales with 2 witnesses with a scale printout if digital, and the fish must be kept frozen intact until certified in case the state writers want to see it. The application can be seen or obtained on the odnr website.


----------



## Mykidsr1 (Mar 19, 2009)

nitefisher said:


> The only water that is ineligible for a state record fish is a pay lake. All state record fish must be examined by a odnr fisheries biologist, must be weighed on state certified scales with 2 witnesses with a scale printout if digital, and the fish must be kept frozen intact until certified in case the state writers want to see it. The application can be seen or obtained on the odnr website.


Maybe it is me but why would anyone one ever want to kill something that friggin awesome? Wish they would come up with a better way to verify the fish so that they can be caught another day.

Sweet fish and I'm personally glad it still swims.


----------



## puterdude (Jan 27, 2006)

great catch,when fishingredhawk,marshall,jignpig,see that photo they won't sleep for a week.


----------



## 65redbeard (Mar 12, 2006)

wonder where you will be this weekend


----------



## fishingredhawk (Apr 14, 2004)

puterdude said:


> great catch,when fishingredhawk,marshall,jignpig,see that photo they won't sleep for a week.


Now that's a true statement!

Wow, what a fish. Congrats to your brother. Too bad he didn't bring his scales. I never leave home without them.


----------



## PromiseKeeper (Apr 14, 2004)

Harbor Hunter said:


> For any fish to be considered as a state record,it should have to be caught from water that anybody can fish,if it's a so-called public record,then it should have to come from public waters.Just my thought,disagree if you will.



With that said....how about those of us that can't fish (from a boat) PUBLIC waters because of horsepower restrictions? Speed limits would make much more sense.


----------



## twistertail (Apr 10, 2004)

nitfisher has it right, I just looked at the official form and it says fish taken from paylakes are ineligible but doesnt say anything else about where you catch it at. Just thought I had heard that it changed at some point, guess not. Its interesting also that it just says that "all fish must be legally taken", I know you can spear carp and suckers and take catfish on trotlines, jugs and bank lines so I wonder if they distinguish between what method you use?


----------



## Harbor Hunter (Aug 19, 2007)

There are many reasons why a fish taken from a private lake should not be considered for a state record.Obviously the main reason(at least in my opinion)is when a guy owns his own pond,he can control every aspect of what goes on,such as making sure that(let's say a bass for example)the fish doesn't have to compete with any other fish for food.Pretty much any food that goes into the pond,natural or commercial,will be for that one particular fish.If the pond is fairly small,the bass won't be expending much energy either to get the food.In short,I think it would be very easy to grow a record size bass in a private farm pond.I do believe there are probably several public lakes in Ohio that have record size fish swimming in them,but with the pressure that public water bass see every day,they're pretty hard to come by.Just look at all the heat the guy from Japan has been getting after he told the story of how he spent $40,000 "feeding" what turned out to be the new world record bass,and it came from a public lake that anybody can fish.Imagine if he spent all that money to grow that bass,and it came from his own private lake!


----------



## twistertail (Apr 10, 2004)

I've thought the same thing Harbor, about "growing" a record bass. But it must not be that easy since the state record has stood since 1976, I'm sure the bass still has to have the right genes to get that big. I'm sure there have been lots of people over the past 34 years who have tried to grow a record bass in their private pond.


----------



## Steel Cranium (Aug 22, 2005)

twistertail said:


> I've thought the same thing Harbor, about "growing" a record bass. But it must not be that easy since the state record has stood since 1976, I'm sure the bass still has to have the right genes to get that big. I'm sure there have been lots of people over the past 34 years who have tried to grow a record bass in their private pond.


Genes and food. My biggest Ohio LM was a shade over 27" from a small spring-fed private pond. Weight? 7.75lbs. Obviously not enough food base in that pond to provide the additional weight to get close to a state record. A lot of things have to be right for the bass to get the length and weight to get close to the record.


----------



## twistertail (Apr 10, 2004)

Not sure if its true or not but I heard that the pond that the record came from was stocked with rainbow trout, and that is what made that bass so fat. No idea if there is any truth to that or not.


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

twistertail said:


> Not sure if its true or not but I heard that the pond that the record came from was stocked with rainbow trout, and that is what made that bass so fat. No idea if there is any truth to that or not.


thats usually the reason given for the monsters being caught out in california, i dont think rainbow trout would survive in a farm pond, so if thats true, then the guy would have had to stock it yearly


----------



## TerryMayberry (Dec 23, 2009)

That's an awesome bass!


----------



## Dandaman (Apr 29, 2006)

All I can say is WOW!!!!!!!!


----------



## FatRap007 (Jul 23, 2009)

Just say nice fish i bet i will never catch one that big !!!!! I dont care if it was private or public he wasnt fishing for that trophy....... Just tell the man congrats 99 % of us will never catch one that big and h did hats off to you my freind dont be a HATER I smell somthing on this post ...........


----------



## Wiper Swiper (May 24, 2005)

FatRap007 said:


> Just say nice fish i bet i will never catch one that big !!!!!


How boring is that? Seriously...what if this place was actually like what you seem to believe is ideal? I mean...what if every thread was nothing more than *"Here's the fish I caught"* and _"awesome job!" _in 25 replies? What if an angling website was so sanitized that unless you were in to "attaboys" (or bragging), there's nothing there for you?

I'm guessing there'd be about 25 members.

The thread starter brought up state records. Several members ran with it a bit, but offered some interesting opinions on the state's largemouth record. 

I was liking it...kinda trying to decide what my opinion was on the subject. That is...until I read your post and point...again.

Buzz kill.


----------



## FatRap007 (Jul 23, 2009)

Nice fish man


----------



## FatRap007 (Jul 23, 2009)

Wiper Swiper said:


> How boring is that? Seriously...what if this place was actually like what you seem to believe is ideal? I mean...what if every thread was nothing more than *"Here's the fish I caught"* and _"awesome job!" _in 25 replies? What if an angling website was so sanitized that unless you were in to "attaboys" (or bragging), there's nothing there for you?
> 
> I'm guessing there'd be about 25 members.
> 
> ...


 Ok if you ever catch one that big dont post it then if it is sooooo boring just keep it all to your self lol i bet you would need to change your underwaer if you got a fish that big lol


----------



## streamstalker (Jul 8, 2005)

Great fish.

Crappy picture.

Yeah for free speech.

Start another thread in the lounge on criteria for state records.


----------



## steelheadBob (Jul 6, 2004)

play nice guys.....


----------



## acklac7 (May 31, 2004)

Wiper Swiper said:


> How boring is that? Seriously...what if this place was actually like what you seem to believe is ideal? I mean...what if every thread was nothing more than *"Here's the fish I caught"* and _"awesome job!" _in 25 replies? What if an angling website was so sanitized that unless you were in to "attaboys" (or bragging), there's nothing there for you?


Not trying to make friends/enemies but Swiper is 100% correct on this one. What makes this board one of (if not the best) fishing forum is the fact that threads are aloud to go in all different directions within reason. As long as no name calling/politics get involved things can get really interesting on here....However last year the powers that be seemed to have been hell bent on fishing reports and reports only, anything other than "nice fish" seemed to get posts deleted/threads closed..Thankfully that kind of moderation has let up and our members are once again aloud to take threads in all sorts of positive,interesting directions.

And just for an FYI I regularly posted on the Florida Sportsman forums while I was down in Florida. ALL the responses you get on that forum are "good fish" or "nice job". After about 5 threads with nothing but "nice fish" responses I quit posting/reading the forum all together....It bored the hell out of me.

And nice Bass Ohio Ice! I hope to be posting some HOG-eye's here soon..Nothing like catching a beast and sharing it with the community


----------



## acklac7 (May 31, 2004)

steelheadbob said:


> play nice guys.....


ohhh noes...new mods! Eek!


----------



## Wiper Swiper (May 24, 2005)

streamstalker said:


> Yeah for free speech.


Naw...ya missed it. It's "yeah" for critical thought.

Oh well.

Awesome fish! If I every caught a fish that big I'd probably...

...call it number 10. Maybe 12.


----------



## Muskarp (Feb 5, 2007)

Nice fish!

But I agree with Wiper and Achlac. Ataboys are boring. 

BTW, Mykidsr1. The reason you mount a fish that "friggin awesome" is because at it's age the chances of fooling it twice are very unlikely. And it will soon succumb to old age and be gone forever. You have to be realistic. That fish is about maxed out for a northern strain largemouth.


----------



## DaleM (Apr 5, 2004)

streamstalker said:


> Great fish.
> 
> Start another thread in the lounge on criteria for state records.


I wouldn't suggest that


----------



## DaleM (Apr 5, 2004)

No matter where he caught it at, we all have to admit we'd love to catch one like it. Not many will ever catch one that big. My biggest is an 8.60 largemouth. I thought that was a monster!
Thanks for sharing the pictures too.

Fatrap your correct on your comment too


----------



## ROCKS (Apr 5, 2008)

Harbor Hunter said:


> The state record is over 13lbs.It's impossible to tell the weight of that bass in the pic,to me it doesn't look like it would beat the record fish,but again it's hard to tell from the pic.On a related note,not meaning any disrespect towards the guy that caught this bass,or any other potential record fish,but I don't see how the ODNR can consider any fish regardless of whatever specie it may be,a state record if it is caught from private waters.The current state record bass was caught from a private farm pond.For any fish to be considered as a state record,it should have to be caught from water that anybody can fish,if it's a so-called public record,then it should have to come from public waters.Just my thought,disagree if you will.


I respect your opinion,but I disagree.


----------



## Ohio Ice (Feb 8, 2009)

Hey Guy's,

I spoke with my brother today and he said it was 26 1/2 inches. He was excited when he told me 27. This pond had a feeder creek to it which i think provides plenty of chubs and bait fish. It really isnt a private pond behind somebody's house. His friend found it last year dear hunting. He has permision to hunt the property. They fished it last year and only caught a few but broke a big one off. That's why they decided to fish it. 

Well we all know it's going to spawn this week and we could probably catch it again. We might take a scale and try. If it is a state record than we would probably have to keep it. Not sure if we want to even temp ourselves.

He does not care to be in the record books if it is a state record and i would feel funny if i caught it again and claimed the trophy when it is on the bed.

I will post the other pictures. He hasnt sent them to me yet..


----------



## spfldbassguy (Mar 23, 2009)

by lookin at it,i gotta say i don't think it was the state record.maybe close,maybe on the same block but no record setter folks..although i have been known 2 b wrong every 10 yrs or so...


----------



## Wiper Swiper (May 24, 2005)

DaleM said:


> Fatrap your correct on your comment too


Honest question here, Dale. I'm only asking it in public because I think everyone could benefit from your "pulse."

Are you saying that Fatrap was correct in feeling that replies to fishing reports should be limited to congratulations? Discussion, and the free exchange of ideas (minus personal attacks) are to be discouraged?


----------



## JignPig Guide (Aug 3, 2007)

puterdude said:


> great catch,when fishingredhawk,marshall,jignpig,see that photo they won't sleep for a week.


*Holly crap! Nice giant!!!*

This giant might not have kept me from sleeping, but it sure as hell woke me up! Congratulations to your brother. That's a pig!


----------



## puterdude (Jan 27, 2006)

Warning! Warning! Will Robinson,someone is about to get Vaporized!


----------



## crittergitter (Jun 9, 2005)

FatRap007 said:


> Just say nice fish i bet i will never catch one that big !!!!! I dont care if it was private or public he wasnt fishing for that trophy....... Just tell the man congrats 99 % of us will never catch one that big and h did hats off to you my freind dont be a HATER I smell somthing on this post ...........


Well here you are telling members how they should respond. Also, how do you know if I will catch one that big or not. Maybe I don't feel like saying that becuase I believe that I WILL catch one that big. You are passing judgement on others for offering their opinion, and well that's what you are doing......offering an opinion. Can you see the irony?

I think it is a fine catch and I am glad he shared it with all of us.


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

crittergitter said:


> Well here you are telling members how they should respond. Also, how do you know if I will catch one that big or not. Maybe I don't feel like saying that becuase I believe that I WILL catch one that big. You are passing judgement on others for offering their opinion, and well that's what you are doing......offering an opinion. Can you see the irony?
> 
> I think it is a fine catch and I am glad he shared it with all of us.


i agree with critter 100%. and i also would not want to be apart of a forum that discouraged critical thought and opinions. we all have one, if you want to give a guy a pat on the back and then move on then so be it but if you want to discuss the question at hand about state records then go for it. its a huge bass and i plan on catching many of that caliber. im not going to assume that i will never catch a fish like that. if you think that then why are you even fishing, the whole point is that the next cast might be a fish of a lifetime!


----------



## JOE B (Nov 3, 2009)

I hope to catch a state record every time I fish. I release 100% of my bass to be able to feel a little better about keeping a monster record fish. Texas' share a lunker program is the best in the country. 13lbs or bigger, they keep the fish, spawn her out for a couple of years, take great care of her, give you a life size replica, then after 3 years you decide what to do with the fish. 99% of them have been returned to the exact water they were caught in. Ohio only has 1 other option for a possible record. You can contact Bass pro shops in Toledo or Cincy, give them the fish for their tank, and you may end up keeping that fish alive. If you were to catch a 14lb fish, it would hard to have the fish "examined" more than just getting the weight and dimensions if you kept it alive long enough to get it in their tanks. Any other options than the ODNR post mortem exam?


----------



## JOE B (Nov 3, 2009)

Ooopssss, Great Fish! +10 lurking in Ohio........


----------



## firstflight111 (May 22, 2008)

WHY IS IT EVERY TIME SOMEONE GET A BIG ONE AND POSTS IT UP JUST SAY NICE JOB AND NOT BASH PPL CAUSE YOU CANT GET A BIG BASS OR GILL OR WHAT EVER PISS POOR IF YOU ASK ME


----------



## acklac7 (May 31, 2004)

firstflight111 said:


> WHY IS IT EVERY TIME SOMEONE GET A BIG ONE AND POSTS IT UP JUST SAY NICE JOB AND NOT BASH PPL CAUSE YOU CANT GET A BIG BASS OR GILL OR WHAT EVER PISS POOR IF YOU ASK ME


Please read back through the thread and inform of us of the "bashing" you see. All we are trying to do is have a discussion about fishing, and now you come along (obviously without reading the entire thread) and accuse people of bashing the guy who caught the fish...Try reading the entire thread before posting next time


----------



## acklac7 (May 31, 2004)

Wiper Swiper said:


> Honest question here, Dale. I'm only asking it in public because I think everyone could benefit from your "pulse."
> 
> Are you saying that Fatrap was correct in feeling that replies to fishing reports should be limited to congratulations? Discussion, and the free exchange of ideas (minus personal attacks) are to be discouraged?


Im very curious as to what Dale meant by that as well. Again, i've been on forums where the threads consist of "nice fish" and "good going" and they are ungodly boring. What keeps me so addicted to OGF is the wide range of directions threads are aloud to go (as long as there productive). Of course when something is beat to death there is no need to have posts that keep repeating what has already been said.


----------



## puterdude (Jan 27, 2006)

Okay Guys,Let's all just calm down ,myself included,and not try to close this guys thread.Rick use to call it hijacking a thread when someone came in and took the original post & drive it in all directions.We can all disagree on the many angles this thread has headed but at the end of the day,it was started showing a Giant hog and it's went everywhere from private ponds being considered in state records,to proper posting procedures.Let's take it back to the fine catch the guy just wanted to show & share with us.Let's not be responsible for closing the thread for that's exactly where this is heading and I for one don't want to see that happen to the guy.It's his post & let's all say nice fish & leave it at that.


----------



## acklac7 (May 31, 2004)

puterdude said:


> Rick use to call it hijacking a thread when someone came in and took the original post & drive it in all directions.


See for me that is what makes this place fun. The more directions a thread go the more you learn about fishing. Now when threads turn into arguments and/or name calling then yea..shut them down.

As I see it the OP (original poster) should be the key decision maker in whether the thread should be locked or not (as long as replies aren't blatantly breaking OGF's rules/causing excessive controversy)

Not to put you on the spot or anything Ohio Ice but are you in anyway upset/unconformable with the direction your thread has taken?


----------



## Fisherman 3234 (Sep 8, 2008)

Congrats on a great fish! We have one Largemouth bass (Florida sub-species) that is a little over 14 lbs (her name is Lucy) at the BPS in Rossford. Another one in the tank wouldn't hurt.... Any Largemouth over 6lbs is a great fish in Ohio!


----------



## CARP 104 (Apr 19, 2004)

Since nobody has even attempted to guess the fish's weight...I will throw it out there. I am going to say that fish is around 8.5-9lbs, which is absolutely phenomenal for Ohio waters. Bare in mind that is only a guess and I could be drastically off....not trying put down or over-hype his catch...just my guess.

I don't think there should be any restrictions on where a state record fish has to be caught. If anybody catches a bass by rod and reel on any pond/reservior/lake/river/quarry/paylake/private property that weighs in as the new state record, then that fish should be considered the new state record....as it was actually the 'largest' bass caught within Ohio borders by rod and reel, plain and simple.

Those are my thoughts on the issue.


----------



## crittergitter (Jun 9, 2005)

puterdude said:


> Okay Guys,Let's all just calm down ,myself included,and not try to close this guys thread.Rick use to call it hijacking a thread when someone came in and took the original post & drive it in all directions.We can all disagree on the many angles this thread has headed but at the end of the day,it was started showing a Giant hog and it's went everywhere from private ponds being considered in state records,to proper posting procedures.Let's take it back to the fine catch the guy just wanted to show & share with us.Let's not be responsible for closing the thread for that's exactly where this is heading and I for one don't want to see that happen to the guy.It's his post & let's all say nice fish & leave it at that.


I completely disagree with you, in a respectful and courteous way of course. I to do not want to see this thread locked, and I will state that it should not be as it is perfectly civil and on topic. LOOK at the TITLE of the thread. The original poster is asking, "Do you think this bass was potentially a state record fish?" Ok, I changed the nice, neat topic into a nice, detailed sentence, but it is the same thing. When you post that..............you are going to get a variety of responses. Had the title been, "Look At This Hog", then maybe the other comments would be a little unwarranted. Why are some members so upset when others voice their opinion especially when the original poster ASKED for opinions. If I don't like someone else's opinion, I just ignore it. I do not try to tell them how to post on a forum board.


----------



## DaleM (Apr 5, 2004)

Wiper Swiper said:


> Honest question here, Dale. I'm only asking it in public because I think everyone could benefit from your "pulse."
> 
> Are you saying that Fatrap was correct in feeling that replies to fishing reports should be limited to congratulations? Discussion, and the free exchange of ideas (minus personal attacks) are to be discouraged?


Nope just this part--

i bet you would need to change your underwaer if you got a fish that big lol 
__________________


----------



## Marshall (Apr 11, 2004)

Sweet fish. If it were not for private waters or secluded places like that ,we all would not see many of the nice fish caught. Nice job on the release. Thats the genes you want in a body of water. Fish like that are hard to come by, i have been trying all spring to get a good one but have yet to be successful. Go buy yourself a scale and camera and take it with you on every trip. Its always nice to know what they weigh especially when they are that big. Good Job.


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

CARP 104 said:


> I don't think there should be any restrictions on where a state record fish has to be caught. If anybody catches a bass by rod and reel on any pond/reservior/lake/river/quarry/paylake/private property that weighs in as the new state record, then that fish should be considered the new state record....as it was actually the 'largest' bass caught within Ohio borders by rod and reel, plain and simple.
> 
> Those are my thoughts on the issue.


i agree with most of that but in no way should a fish be considered for state record status if it came from a paylake. most of those fish are imported. i dont think a largemouth brought from california to ohio should be recognized as an ohio state record.


----------



## CARP 104 (Apr 19, 2004)

lordofthepunks said:


> i agree with most of that but in no way should a fish be considered for state record status if it came from a paylake. most of those fish are imported. i dont think a largemouth brought from california to ohio should be recognized as an ohio state record.


In that scenario I would also agree with you. I was not aware paylakes imported fish, I thought that this was possibly illegal, but since it's a private body I am guessing that's not the case.....I have never fished a paylake.


----------



## Einzig (Mar 11, 2010)

It is awesome for Ohio! Not like he was sitting on Falcon or Amistad. 

Congratulations!


----------



## Wiper Swiper (May 24, 2005)

DaleM said:


> Nope just this part--
> 
> I bet you would need to change your underwear if you got a fish that big. lol
> __________________


Dale, I apppreciate your reply. I suspected that's what you meant, but would by lying if I didn't admit that the ornery side of me was...errr...seein' the vulgar image in the ink spot. It's just me, don't think too hard on that. I'm manic, without the medication. 

Briefly on the hi-jack..acklac got it exactly right (per my measure of delusion.) The thread starter should be the barometer. He ain't complaining. Why do some of you? Are the opinions of fellow anglers really that intimidating? Civil discourse stimulates the mind. Congratulations stimulates the ego. Personally, my ego could do without the stimulation. My mind, on the other hand...could use all the stimulation it can find. That's why I check in. I do enjoy the benign reports, however, if folks are thinkin'...I learn something with every sentence that starts_--"I hear you...but."_

I'm wierd that way.

Now, concerning the bass at hand, state records, qualifications, and such. I've formed an opinion.

That's a great fish. I've never boated a largemouth that big...from any water. OGF should be thrilled that they've got a site where it's members can "scoop" all the competition with a post like that. You heard it here first!

That said, I've decided I don't care who holds the state record. Or, how "legitimate" it is.

If I catch a trophy, it is what it is. It was my moment, and "your" award doesn't add or distract from the effort it took me to bring it to hand. In fact, I've caught "trophies" that don't measure up to any stat keeper's rule. My oldest son's first 14" river smallie was a "record." My youngest son's first 5 lb. Erie smallie was a "record." I put 'em on an equal plane. They were both an awesome experience to be part of!

I'm not knocking folks that chase records. I am saying that if your record doesn't hold up against someone elses yard stick...yer out nothing. Document a 9 lb. greenie out of public water, and then have someone tell you that a 12 lb. greenie from private water is more impressive...ummm...I'll argue they're on an equal plane.

Ohio Ice, that ain't an Ohio record largemouth. BUT...that may be the OGF record largemouth!

Anyone got a different opinion on that?


----------



## Ohio Ice (Feb 8, 2009)

Hey Guy's,

This tread went a lot of directions and that is ok with me. I am still trying to get the other pictures so we can get a better gues on the weight. 

The picture is bad because it was taken with an old style cell phone and he is holding the fish away from his body. Us old tournament anglers know that trick. However this is a very big fish. look at how wide the fish is from head until the tail. If you can make out the eyeball it is huge. I have caught em over eight at hoover and this fish is way bigger.

Hopefully other pictures coming soon. I forgot to call him today to get them.


----------

