Why do certain similar baits work better?

[Will1248]

I am a biochemist so I conduct casual experiments in my free time. I have spent $100s testing out different baits, colors, patterns, materials, etc as I'm sure you all have. My question is why does a functionally similar bait get dramatically different results. A common example is a Yamamoto Senko vs a Yum Dinger. 

 

Testing areas:

Lake Murray, SC 

Lake Hartwell, SC

Various family and friends pond in SC

 

In my personal experience I have tried dang near every Zoom Super Fluke. I notice dramatically different results between other brands, colors, sizes etc. The Zoom White Pearl Super Fluke catches the most bass by far, followed by Green Pumpkin in stained water. I have tried like 20 caffeine shad colors, yum Houdini, Berkley Jerk etc. I have tried White super fluke and albino shiner with abysmal results except for the albino shiner outperforming specifically at sun up as light starts cresting, so I am assuming it is the light reflection. I have tried all the different watermelon flakes and green pumpkin flakes. But specifically the green pumpkin black flake noticeably gets more attention.  

 

Now here is the weird part. I have tried the super fluke jr 4" and fluke 4" and the fluke gets significantly more hits, I use a 2/0 ewg for control. And to top all of that off I notice that specifically white ice and watermelon seed outperforms the traditional white pearl and green pumpkin in that size, EVEN when the fish are biting the larger Super Fluke in those colors. I don't understand! If I swap to a larger size in the exact same colors... no to little attention. Even on a tandem rig.  I will even swap the position of the baits with the exact same results. 

 

My theory is that the smaller colors being more translucent mimics juvenile bait fish as they typically have newer scales with less coloration. 

As for the plastic technology, dye, and weight I am at a loss. 

I have no idea why the results vary so dramatically. 

[AlabamaSpothunter]

It's the magic of fishing imho.  

 

I've seen on numerous occasions including just a couple days where two anglers can be throwing the exact same bait, on the nearly identical rod/reel/line setups, using the exact same retrieve, and yet only one of those anglers is catching fish.   Moreover, one of those anglers can use the other angler's setup who isn't catching fish and then catches fish on it.   It defies logic and belief, so I just chalk it up to the magic of fishing.  

 

Personally, I don't really want to know how all the magic tricks are done, and this is why I've always been so torn on the issue of FFS.   

 

 

[Tennessee Boy]

If you’re a biochemist then I assume you’re familiar with the concept of statistical significance.  Can you share your experimental process,  the numbers you observed,  and the level of statistical significance you observed?

 

I think the vast majority of conclusions that most anglers reach on these matters are the results of misinterpretation of the natural randomness in fishing.   I’m not saying some baits don’t work better than others,  I’m just saying I’ve rarely seen statistically significant data that supports it.

[AlabamaSpothunter]

6 minutes ago, Tennessee Boy said:

If you’re a biochemist then I assume you’re familiar with the concept of statistical significance.  Can you share your experimental process,  the numbers you observed,  and the level of statistical significance you observed?

 

I think the vast majority of conclusions that most anglers reach on these matters are the results of misinterpretation of the natural randomness in fishing.   I’m not saying some baits don’t work better than others,  I’m just saying I’ve rarely seen statistics significant data that supports it.

Exactly, the problem is as anglers we can't recreate the exact same conditions from trip to trip in order to have the proper controls in place to test hypothesis.    

 

The puzzle resets every day at midnight, the greatest sample size we can hope for can only be found in one single fishing trip.  

 

The amount of variables in fishing is equal to the number of stars in the sky, we can make general observations and conclusions, but there's hardly any settled science in fishing.    It's far more dark magic than science imho.  

[Will1248]

@Tennessee Boy I assume you don't work outside of work? I did say casual experiments. 

 

For the most part you control the rod, reel, line, hook, knot, retrieve, and probe the same areas for a full day. I tie one pattern or brand and fish it the whole day. That way I can tell if there is interest in the particular bait. Pitfalls is the time of day, hunger schedule, repeatability(different fish, locations, etc), and the "magic" @AlabamaSpothunter pointed out. 

 

Additionally, I have bedding bass near my dock and can swap baits quickly with the same retrieve to see the interest in each bait. Some patterns like Arkansas shiner literally got no interest. While baby bass got a nose down. And green pumpkin got a nibble. Results seemed to reproduce consistently. I notice bedding bass in my area really prefer white things while on the bed.  

 

Ponds with aggressive fish are the easiest to gauge. Just throw a bait for 10 mins around the pond and see the anecdotal results. If I catch 20 bass on one pattern and 0 doing the same method then switch back and get 15 there is obviously something there.

 

I am not going to make an excel sheet and track data for an outdoor hobby. 

[WRB]

Why?…..only the bass know !

Tom

[Rucksack]

I think all of the standard non-human natural variables (clarity, forage, temperature, wind, light levels, etc) apply. I also agree that we're not running controlled trials out there on the water. However, I think there is a major human element to this consisting of two parts.

 

I'll use the example of fluke-style baits. At my local lake, I can't buy a bite with a Zoom super fluke in any color. I've tried a ton of them. However, the standard caffeine shad in white does exceptionally well. It's a stark difference, I wrote a post about it a while back, and as it was immediately noticable and has been a durable pattern. 

 

I think it's a blend of individual angler and what the fish get habituated to from other anglers. The caffeine shad has a way different action than the zoom, and I think it just works better with how I like to retrieve and probably my personal gear. Additionally I suspect the other anglers are throwing Zoom products (based on trash I find and observation) so the fish learn to avoid something that looks like a Zoom fluke -- no matter the color.

[JediAmoeba]

The same reason you buy 10 crankbaits of the same color and only a few of them get bit. It's magic

[MonsterZero]

I am not sure you can ever narrow it down to any one thing across the board. The fish want what they want in the moment, without caring what we think they should be targeting. I recall a story from a friend. He and another guy were surf fishing for striped bass using black Bombers in the middle of the night. Identical lures. My friend was not catching anything but a sore shoulder while his friend was hammering fish. So they switched plugs, and my friend started catching and the other guy was missing out. They compared lures, and the only difference was eye color; the bass wanted the red eyes and not the yellow.

 

Sometimes it is not even the lure that matters. Two guys fishing the exact same lure in the exact same location can have very different results based solely on presentation and retrieve. Whoever has the most appetizing cadence on retrieval is going to get the fish, regardless of what the actual bait looks like. Many, many, many variables involved.

[Scott F]

1 hour ago, Will1248 said:

Additionally, I have bedding bass near my dock and can swap baits quickly with the same retrieve to see the interest in each bait. Some patterns like Arkansas shiner literally got no interest. While baby bass got a nose down. And green pumpkin got a nibble. Results seemed to reproduce consistently. I notice bedding bass in my area really prefer white things while on the bed.  

 

Since bedding bass are not feeding, it may not be that they “prefer” white it’s that they see that as more of a threat and pick it up to remove it from the bed. A friend of mine who bed fishes, (I avoid fishing bass on beds) prefers white because it’s easier for him to see when the fish picks up the bait. 
In my experiments with colors and plastics, I couldn’t find and difference in catch rates when using different colors. Using Senkos, which we all know are fragile and don’t last long, I’d change colors every time in needed to replace a damaged bait. It was only when on a trip and switched to a Berkeley power bait sinking worm that didn’t catch a fish, then in exactly the same spot switched back to a senko and started to catch them again. In those experiments, color didn’t matter.

[Mobasser]

I've noticed that certain identical baits work better, and I've also seen when one plastic bait that's caught fish, and torn or looks rough has out fished a brand new identical bait. I have no explanation.

[Pumpkin Lizard]

3 hours ago, Will1248 said:

I am a biochemist so I conduct casual experiments in my free time. I have spent $100s testing out different baits, colors, patterns, materials, etc as I'm sure you all have. My question is why does a functionally similar bait get dramatically different results. A common example is a Yamamoto Senko vs a Yum Dinger. 

 

Testing areas:

Lake Murray, SC 

Lake Hartwell, SC

Various family and friends pond in SC

 

In my personal experience I have tried dang near every Zoom Super Fluke. I notice dramatically different results between other brands, colors, sizes etc. The Zoom White Pearl Super Fluke catches the most bass by far, followed by Green Pumpkin in stained water. I have tried like 20 caffeine shad colors, yum Houdini, Berkley Jerk etc. I have tried White super fluke and albino shiner with abysmal results except for the albino shiner outperforming specifically at sun up as light starts cresting, so I am assuming it is the light reflection. I have tried all the different watermelon flakes and green pumpkin flakes. But specifically the green pumpkin black flake noticeably gets more attention.  

 

Now here is the weird part. I have tried the super fluke jr 4" and fluke 4" and the fluke gets significantly more hits, I use a 2/0 ewg for control. And to top all of that off I notice that specifically white ice and watermelon seed outperforms the traditional white pearl and green pumpkin in that size, EVEN when the fish are biting the larger Super Fluke in those colors. I don't understand! If I swap to a larger size in the exact same colors... no to little attention. Even on a tandem rig.  I will even swap the position of the baits with the exact same results. 

 

My theory is that the smaller colors being more translucent mimics juvenile bait fish as they typically have newer scales with less coloration. 

As for the plastic technology, dye, and weight I am at a loss. 

I have no idea why the results vary so dramatically. 

 

When I find a soft plastic bait I like, I will generally keep three colors max.  A lighter/brighter color, something medium like green pumpkin or pumpkin and something dark.  And before changing baits I will change color.

 

For example for Rage Bugs, I have Bama Craw, Green Pumpkin and the dark black/blue color.

 

Zoom Lizards are weird for me because as far as I am concerned they only come in one color.

[FishTank]

Unfortunately..... Confidence in a bait will catch more fish than data. 

[Bird]

If you throw the bait that is less effective 100 times more often then the bait that is seemingly effective.......it should equal out. 😁

 

But sometimes it just doesn't make sense.

Was fishing an extremely clear mountain lake last year, bluebird skies and my buddy ties on a 3/4 oz double willow spinnerbait, silver blades, 5" trailer, big splash on the cast and slayed the fish.

 

Solving the puzzle keeps us young.

[king fisher]

To give bass fisherman something to argue about when their water is covered with ice. By the way Yum dingers catch more bass than Senkos.

[AlabamaSpothunter]

Just now, king fisher said:

To give bass fisherman something to argue about when their water is covered with ice. By the way Yum fingers catch more bass than Senkos.

I tell you what, arguably the costliest mistake I've ever made in fishing is buying Yamamoto senkos to start out with.   I've bought Yum, H20, and a few other much cheaper ones, but I can't make myself fish them long enough to overwhelm the massive amount of confidence I have in the OG ones.   

 

On the other hand I spent a few hundred in big cheaper ABS swimbaits before buying my first resin one that cost as much as all the cheaper ones.   It was only then that I learned the awesomeness of glide baits.   

 

I guess the moral of the story is fish can't tell how much the bait cost 😁

[Rucksack]

39 minutes ago, AlabamaSpothunter said:

I tell you what, arguably the costliest mistake I've ever made in fishing is buying Yamamoto senkos to start out with.   I've bought Yum, H20, and a few other much cheaper ones, but I can't make myself fish them long enough to overwhelm the massive amount of confidence I have in the OG ones.   

 

On the other hand I spent a few hundred in big cheaper ABS swimbaits before buying my first resin one that cost as much as all the cheaper ones.   It was only then that I learned the awesomeness of glide baits.   

 

I guess the moral of the story is fish can't tell how much the bait cost 😁

I fished a lot of BPS plastic worms, then bought a bag Senkos. I regret ever doing that, because now I know how much more I prefer the Senkos and I'm not a rich man 🤣.

[JHoss]

18 hours ago, Tennessee Boy said:

If you’re a biochemist then I assume you’re familiar with the concept of statistical significance.  Can you share your experimental process,  the numbers you observed,  and the level of statistical significance you observed?

 

I think the vast majority of conclusions that most anglers reach on these matters are the results of misinterpretation of the natural randomness in fishing.   I’m not saying some baits don’t work better than others,  I’m just saying I’ve rarely seen statistically significant data that supports it.

THIS! It's near impossible to run a legit experiment on bass in the wild. How do I know? because in my experiments, Caffeine Shads crush Super Flukes. In all seriousness, there's too many variables to control in the wild to test this. And even if you studied them in a tank, there's enough diversity in a bass population, that your finds won't be accurate from one lake to the next. 

 

17 hours ago, Will1248 said:

For the most part you control the rod, reel, line, hook, knot, retrieve, and probe the same areas for a full day. I tie one pattern or brand and fish it the whole day. That way I can tell if there is interest in the particular bait. Pitfalls is the time of day, hunger schedule, repeatability(different fish, locations, etc), and the "magic" @AlabamaSpothunter pointed out. 

I would think this is the worst possible way to experiment. This would give you a gauge of the mood of a fish population on a given day. A better way would be to cycle baits every X number of casts throughout a day. Still won't be perfect as the baits won't go past the same number of bass or specific cover, but would be more representative of what their bait/color preference is that day.

 

 

Some pro Scopers have been know to experiment in practice to find the best bait combo. They'll cast to 10 fish with X head and X plastic, then the next 10 with X head and Y plastic, then the next 10 with, Y head and X plastic, etc etc until they can say they're getting more bites on a certain combo. That's as close to a legit experiment as you're ever going to get with this.