A Pro Angler Voices Concerns About FFS

[Texas Flood]

9 minutes ago, Koz said:

You’re lucky. Were those local events or MLF or BASS events?

Oh just local clubs so I cant compare it to MLF or BASS. I also fish them with my BIL, so im more vocal if I have an issue but I can see others not having that luxury if they're on a boat with a rando. 

[Tennessee Boy]

I like the comparison between Barry Bonds and those using FFS.   I read a fascinating study years ago where they used physics to calculated in amazing detail how many home runs Bonds would have hit without steroids.   They determined how much stronger he got based on the weight he gained when he started juicing.  They looked at every home run he hit and calculated how much further it went because of his additional strength.  They determined he would have about as many home runs as Willie May without juicing but would not have broken Ruth’s record.  Steroids made him stronger but didn’t not make him more talented.  They did not make it easier to hit a ball, they made it easier to hit a ball further.  
 

I’m certain that FFS changes the game.   It allows talented anglers to catch more fish.   It is not easy to master.  It requires learning new skills.  The primary benefit it provides is it makes you more efficient if you are able to take advantage of the information it provides.  Being efficient in figuring out a pattern is critical in tournament fishing.  The notion that a bunch of untalented kid are dominating the sport thanks to FFS is clearly not supported by the facts.

 

The major difference between FFS and steroids is that steroids are illegal and FFS is not.  Steroids are dangerous and those that take the risk of using them have an advantage over those that do not.  Banning them is the right thing to do.   I don’t think steroids hurt baseball from a fans prospective.  Strong players are more fun to watch.  

[gim]

[Texas Flood]

Bring Steroids Back to Baseball

[Swamp Girl]

33 minutes ago, Texas Flood said:

Bring Steroids Back to Baseball

 

I'd rather see FFS brought to baseball, albeit radar than sonar (FFR) and radar so powerful that it would read how the pitchers are holding the ball. 

[Koz]

2 hours ago, Texas Flood said:

Oh just local clubs so I cant compare it to MLF or BASS. I also fish them with my BIL, so im more vocal if I have an issue but I can see others not having that luxury if they're on a boat with a rando. 

I’m not being condescending here because I fish local tournaments as well, but prize money for boaters in even an MLF Phoenix Series event can be $10k to $100k depending upon the event. 

 

That changes things a lot.

[Logan S]

It would be kind of surprising, but I could see FFS being banned in BFL's.  In the BFL's co-anglers exist for 2 reasons, #1 for money and #2 for preventing cheating.  BFL's don't allow open boats (#2), so if there aren't enough Co's they make any non-linked boaters double up in boater-boater draws.  Most boaters don't want to do this, so if it's known the co field is light, anyone not linked already just won't sign up....Which means even less $$$.  

 

I've been reading/hearing BFL Co #'s are down in most divisions and a big reason is FFS.  Being a co was hard enough already, but the prospect of sitting out in the middle of the lake all day without ever getting a meaningful cast makes it worse so many anglers just aren't bothering anymore (one even in this thread)

 

Less co's means less money, but the ripple effect of also decreasing boater participation compounds it.  BFL income is probably pretty important to MLF as a whole since it is by far the largest angler (customer) base for them.  If they have good data showing FFS is a major reason for declining numbers, banning it would be logical.  

[Smokinal]

I haven't read 9 pages of comments so forgive me if this has been covered, but what's that type of sonar that every single one of us is using, has been using for the last ~40 years again?

It literally shows fish on your screen, they show up in red/blue/yellow lines, every fall we drop blade baits on them, we can see our blades being ripped off the bottom, we drop drop-shots on them in the summer...oh yeah, 2D sonar.

100% of us are ok with this. Is it because 2D looks down and FFS looks forward?

 

[Logan S]

4 minutes ago, Smokinal said:

100% of us are ok with this. Is it because 2D looks down and FFS looks forward?

Yes, that's correct.

[gim]

2D sonar is not an immediate feed back as in "live" either.  You go over it and see what's there but not in real time.  You can literally follow the fish follow your lure with livescope.

[F14A-B]

11 minutes ago, gimruis said:

2D sonar is not an immediate feed back as in "live" either.  You go over it and see what's there but not in real time.  You can literally follow the fish follow your lure with livescope.

Exactly, I watched Trey chase a big ole female that was cruising by and followed her ,saw where she stopped then caught her. Lake Fork. 

[Choporoz]

Someone, maybe Hamner or McKinney, broke one off using a jerkbait, and was able to follow that fish around and hook it again with his jerkbait still in her.  I couldn't do that with downscan.

[Texas Flood]

1 hour ago, Koz said:

I’m not being condescending here because I fish local tournaments as well, but prize money for boaters in even an MLF Phoenix Series event can be $10k to $100k depending upon the event. 

 

That changes things a lot.

Oh I agree totally. I was doing a terrible job of explaining that it would be way more difficult for the more pro side of co angler than just a dumb guy like me doing local tourneys. 

[GReb]

2D is limited. The cone makes it virtually useless in shallow water whereas livescope has no limits with perspective mode. 

[Susky River Rat]

40 minutes ago, Choporoz said:

Someone, maybe Hamner or McKinney, broke one off using a jerkbait, and was able to follow that fish around and hook it again with his jerkbait still in her.  I couldn't do that with downscan.

I think he dropped it in with the cull tag.

[BucksBasser]

4 hours ago, Tennessee Boy said:

I like the comparison between Barry Bonds and those using FFS.   I read a fascinating study years ago where they used physics to calculated in amazing detail how many home runs Bonds would have hit without steroids.   They determined how much stronger he got based on the weight he gained when he started juicing.  They looked at every home run he hit and calculated how much further it went because of his additional strength.  They determined he would have about as many home runs as Willie May without juicing but would not have broken Ruth’s record.  Steroids made him stronger but didn’t not make him more talented.  They did not make it easier to hit a ball, they made it easier to hit a ball further.  
 

I’m certain that FFS changes the game.   It allows talented anglers to catch more fish.   It is not easy to master.  It requires learning new skills.  The primary benefit it provides is it makes you more efficient if you are able to take advantage of the information it provides.  Being efficient in figuring out a pattern is critical in tournament fishing.  The notion that a bunch of untalented kid are dominating the sport thanks to FFS is clearly not supported by the facts.

 

The major difference between FFS and steroids is that steroids are illegal and FFS is not.  Steroids are dangerous and those that take the risk of using them have an advantage over those that do not.  Banning them is the right thing to do.   I don’t think steroids hurt baseball from a fans prospective.  Strong players are more fun to watch.  

 

What is interesting is that when HR production dropped off after the steroid crackdown MLB decided to juice up the ball and add other rule changes to increase offensive production.

[Bankc]

2 hours ago, Smokinal said:

I haven't read 9 pages of comments so forgive me if this has been covered, but what's that type of sonar that every single one of us is using, has been using for the last ~40 years again?

It literally shows fish on your screen, they show up in red/blue/yellow lines, every fall we drop blade baits on them, we can see our blades being ripped off the bottom, we drop drop-shots on them in the summer...oh yeah, 2D sonar.

100% of us are ok with this. Is it because 2D looks down and FFS looks forward?

 

It's mostly because FFS shows a live view of what's happening across multiple dimensions.  You can watch an individual fish react to your bait in real time, which allows you to adjust mid retrieve to target a single fish. 

 

Whereas with traditional sonars, including stuff like downscan and sidescan, you're not getting a live view of what's happening in front of you.  In fact, 2D sonar isn't really even 2D.  It's more like a one dimensional sonar (only the single dimension is a cone, not an infinitely thin line) across time.  You can't see height and width, you can only see height and time.  How it works, is it's basically just the old style flasher sonar only where ever return sequence is displayed in a single row of pixels on the far right side of the screen.  And then, as the next sonar return sequence comes it, it moves that first row of returns over one pixel to the left to display the next return sequence in it's spot.  And that pattern repeats until the whole screen is filled with moments of sonar return with the newest on the right and oldest on the left. 

 

What you see isn't what the bottom actually looks like, even though it can kind of look like the bottom.  And what this means is, if you're traveling forward with the sonar running, it shows you the bottom that's behind you, because behind you is also in the past.  But if you're remaining still, it's showing you the same bottom, only at different moments in time, but it appears as if it's showing you the layout of the bottom. 

 

Why this matters is because it's hard to target a fish like this.  You can see it below you and know it's depth, but you can't see exactly what it's doing.  You can't watch it react in real time to your bait.  And you can't accurately judge it's size.  If it moves out of the cone quickly enough, a very large fish can appear very small.  And if a small fish just hangs out in the cone long enough, it can appear very large.  So you can't watch the fish move and tell how it's reacting to your bait, because there's not way to distinguish between size and movement on traditional sonar.   Whereas with FFS, you can actually watch the fish follow or ignore your bait, and pinpoint the exact moment it either commits to the bait, or turns away. 

[AlabamaSpothunter]

For many folks including myself, the problem with FFS is the future more than the current.   

 

BASS or MLF have no plan how to cap technology in the sport, and this is the real scary aspect to FFS tech.  We're only scratching a really small surface in terms of what the tech will evolve into. 

 

 

[Koz]

15 hours ago, Texas Flood said:

Oh I agree totally. I was doing a terrible job of explaining that it would be way more difficult for the more pro side of co angler than just a dumb guy like me doing local tourneys. 

 

No, you’re not a dumb guy and local tournaments are fun and rewarding.

 

And BTW, Phoenix co anglers aren’t fishing for chump change. Depending upon the event, first place pays $3k - $50k.

[Texas Flood]

1 hour ago, Bankc said:

Whereas with FFS, you can actually watch the fish follow or ignore your bait

This is one thing I think people who have never used FFS don’t quite understand. 
 

 

It’s on my boat and I can honestly say how surprised I was to see so many fish follow my bait just to turn around. It was actually infuriating. 
 

[Smokinal]

I should point out that I have Mega360, SpotLock, LVS34 FFS etc...I enjoy the latest tech.

I'm just playing Devil's Advocate with the 2D.

I guess what I'm saying is that this is just another tool that has come along, that in time, will be the norm. 

And I can't stress enough about what has been said regarding fish ignoring your bait. If you haven't used it, people think they just jump in the boat. 

Now, speaking out of the other side of my mouth, I do not enjoy seeing the kids stroll around, not casting, waiting to see a spot and then casting to it. I agree that if you removed it, the new kids would struggle and Denny Brauer would win the Classic 😀😉

[Texas Flood]

I still think Tyler Williams will be the next Denny Brauer. Kid loves to throw a jig. 

[Pat Brown]

I don't think it matters if it exists and people want to use it, let them - maybe even allow it for pre fishing so you can dial in the bite and presentation during practice or whatever.

 

That seems fine.  I don't think it's evil or needs to be illegal.  I just think every sport needs limitations and maybe we found a good place to limit competitors to make it more about deep level bass fishing mojo and less about technological expertise or something.

 

I do agree that what comes next and whether BASS has any plans at all to limit technology are more concerning at this point than people using FFS.  That cat is pretty much out of the box - it just diminishes the professional sport to me, personally.  People should use it if it's fun for them - for fun fishing.  👍🏻😉

[gim]

2 minutes ago, Pat Brown said:

maybe even allow it for pre fishing so you can dial in the bite and presentation during practice or whatever

The pro muskie tournament trail  (PMTT) did exactly that. They can use it for pre fishing but the ducers have to be removed during tournament hours.

 

Ironically, they have a 2 day event starting Friday about 15 mins from my house too. Lots of them scoping for muskies this week. The tactic is a little different though - they don’t want to catch them, they only wanna find them and then come back on tourney day and catch one or two.

[Swamp Girl]

7 hours ago, Pat Brown said:

I don't think it matters if it exists and people want to use it, let them - maybe even allow it for pre fishing so you can dial in the bite and presentation during practice or whatever.

 

That seems fine.  I don't think it's evil or needs to be illegal.  I just think every sport needs limitations and maybe we found a good place to limit competitors to make it more about deep level bass fishing mojo and less about technological expertise or something.

 

I do agree that what comes next and whether BASS has any plans at all to limit technology are more concerning at this point than people using FFS.  That cat is pretty much out of the box - it just diminishes the professional sport to me, personally.  People should use it if it's fun for them - for fun fishing.  👍🏻😉

 

I'm guessing that drones with sonar are what comes next. An angler would launch a squadron of drones, which would drop transducers into the water across a body of water, and then AI would sort in a nanosecond which bass to target first, second, and so on. This technology already exists. It would be simply a matter of marrying a transducer to a drone, presided by A.I. Fishing, sound-wise, would be like sticking your head into a hornets' nest, with the angry whine of drones drowning out all the sounds of nature. The 300 hp engines would be the percussion for this heavy metal band. 

 

To make it truly competitive, anglers should also launch fighter drones, to seek and destroy competitors' drones. Boats could be equipped with electromagnetic pulse cannons to disable competitors' boats. Game on! At this point, I might actually watch a tourney.