Zach Dunham

Forgot to mention this too. Swivel will GREATLY reduce your feel fishing a jig, or any other bait that you just sense bites with. And to whoever said you should retie often whether using a swivel or not, doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of using a swivel? If you are going to retie the knot all the time anyways why would you deal with all the negatives of a swivel?

I would say the same thing about big black spinnerbaits! War Eagle 1/2 oz or 3/4 oz night time spinnerbaits!

I rarely, if ever, use a swivel. I feel like snap swivels will break or open before line breaks in some cases. Swivels can, a lot of times, negatively affect the action of the bait you are throwing as well.

Mods, can you change the title to include Open schedule as well? http://www.bassmaster.com/news/2014-opens-qualify-anglers-classic-and-elites I can't believe they are having a Northern Open at Douglas Lake. Why not just have a Northern Open in Florida while we are at it too? There are an infinite number of amazing places to fish in the north, why go that far south with it?

I agree with WRB about not learning at night. Once you are proficient with a baitcaster, it shouldn't be too hard to do it by feel in the dark. LED head light is absolutely necessary; not necessarily to leave on all the time, but at least to do certain things like unhooking fish, retying baits, etc.

Just released today: http://www.bassmaster.com/news/2014-elite-series-targets-americas-hottest-bass-lakes DELAWARE RIVER BABY!! I will definitely be marshaling that tournament and possibly Cayuga as well.

I beg to differ about catching smallies in the dark. I fish some night-time tournaments at Lake Wallenpaupack and it is pretty much 90% smallmouth, even in the dark.

I've never been broken off with braid unless it was rubbed against something really sharp (like a pickerel tooth, something metal in the water). Awesome!

Natural colors only unless in the really early dawn. At dawn or dusk in low light you can get smallmouth to really whack a chartreuse even in clear water. Once there is good visibility I would stay with white skirt and white or silver blades. In general I fish them much faster in clear water and higher in the water column, but as usual, nothing is 100% of the time in fishing. Night time in clear water every one will pretty much agree on: big, dark-colored (usually black for me) spinnerbaits with big, dark-colored (usually black for me) colorado blades.

I still think the injury to the fish argument does apply. Yes, standard treble hook lures can and do still inflict damage, but from what I've seen with umbrella rigs it is far worse damage when it happens and they get tangled around.

I really hope you are joking.

I wouldn't say that is luck at all. Aaron Martens changed the probability distribution of the outcomes by making a long run in dangerously rough water. He made a breakdown more likely than it should have been and it happened. It is all just a risk/reward system. He may have had better fish there but he also may not make it back in time or at all. He knew this and made the choice to do that anyways.

When getting them out of the livewell without culling balls or anything I just grab them from the top behind the gills. Occasionally you get spiked if you miss but that's all part of the fun. If the fish is too big to actually lift out like that I just grab it the same way and then turn it over a bit and get the lip also.

Spinnerbaits! They come in so many colors, sizes, and varieties and can be fished so many different ways. I love the versatility.

Depends on the situation and timing, but if I knew the person just lost the lure I would definitely go over and give it back.

Nerdy conversations are fun! OK OK, I won't keep going with it much further, just this last part. As far as fishing next to people and throwing the same baits but not catching, we can just break out more variables: retrieve, minor differences in the exact location being fished, etc. Take all of the variables into account (we may not know them all yet, but it is possible to eventually know them all), and then you have a list of possible outcomes that can happen with all of said variables taken into account. Of the set of outcomes created, each has a chance of happening and their chances add up to 100%. The only way to change your "luck" is to change the variables so that the more likely outcomes in the set are outcomes that benefit you. That's why I say it is similar to poker: you can never control them all, but you make the odds in your favor and you'll do better in the long run thanks to variance (or worse thanks to variance if one isn't very good). This conversation is satisfying my day whether I am right or wrong. I probably could have taken more time to write this but I had to do it in 2 minutes because I am about to leave work!

It has been more difficult this year than it has in the past 5 or so for me. I don't think I've had it as bad as you have though. The weather early in the year and even this summer has been different than past years. It has actually been an extremely cool summer except for one 5-day period of 90s. It hasn't been over 90 since early July now and really in most of August it hasn't been much above 80, and with nights in the 50s or lower. Weather may be it.

I didn't mean that luck and variance are the same thing, I meant that luck doesn't actually exist but variance is the reason why it sometimes seems that it does. I'm not going to explain why variance is the correct term when I can just link it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variance

This is definitely 100% incorrect (about pros thinking it is all luck in the end). Yes, there is luck (or variance, the more proper statistical term) involved, just like in playing poker, yet the best still win the most consistently. There are infinite ways to make your odds the best. The pros that are consistently on top are great at creating good situations for themselves. There is a reason why a guy like Kevin VanDam has qualified for 20-something straight Bassmaster Classics and has cashed a check in 30-something straight Elite Series tournaments. It isn't luck when it happens over a long period of time and you have a large data set. Aaron Martens placing 2nd, 8th, 2nd, 5th and 12th (would have been first or second with no break down), in the last 5 Elite tournaments is not luck. As for finding the big ones, occasionally someone may get lucky and run into a lunker, but to catch entire limits of big ones (or larger average size) is not luck. If it was luck you would see guys going up and down a lot in a 4 day tournament. It does happen to some of the time, but a lot of the time the ones on top in any given tournament had 4 very consistent days of good weight.

Personally, I just don't like using leaders if I don't have to. In my opinion it just adds more points of failure. I have had success even in pretty clear water with Vicious Ultimate Copolymer Mono at 6lb or 8lb. I'm sure the brand doesn't matter all that much, it is just my preference.

Only because I feel like I now need to defend myself, what I WOULD do is make a big stink on scene (short of actually threatening someone), make sure the officers name was published and that the story got out via internet and/or newspaper (if they actually believe in the ticket they wrote, they should have no problem with it), and I would show up to court and do as much as I could to get a stupid rule changed.

I'm officially retiring from this topic as it is obviously not going to go anywhere. Oh, and I actually have written my legislators about rules and laws in the past. The problem is, one person means nothing to them, you need a lot of people who are willing to stand up for things and not just get walked on.

OK then, I'll leave it at just the one part of the question, why is it wrong to disagree with authority and/or the rules? I have done so with a logical argument. No threats, all coherent and laid out.

You say that but you fail to explain why that example is poor. I'd appreciate even one reason why that is absurd. PM me we don't need to change the topic on the thread. I'd be interested in hearing if there is actually something I am missing. Making it electronic is a piece of cake. I'm a software engineer, I know how easy it is. You buy your fishing license and you get electronically rung up for it as it is now. Making a database with such simple information as driver's license, first and last name, and address, is SO easy I could do it by myself in an hour. It would take me literally 5 seconds to type in a first and last name and see, ah, they have a license this year.

Maybe, maybe not. But you are missing the point. The rule itself is ridiculous and pointless and is literally there to shaft people who follow the rules; especially when it is easy to just have an electronic system in place that would fix all of this. If you just want to lay down and let them walk all over you, be my guest. If something like this happens to me, I know a few people who could blow this up in the newspapers and make a big enough deal to change the rules. We make this country what we want. This is literally exactly the same as DUI laws. If you really wanted to get rid of drunk driving, you would just make it a law for all cars to have a breathalyzer to start them and then it is impossible to drive drunk. But of course, that would stop the cash flow that DUIs bring in to the police. This is the same exact thing, the only reason a rule like that exists when there are obviously more sensible ways of doing things, is MONEY.