The current World Record Largemouth

[earthworm77]

Does anyone think it is truly a legitimate record?

[roadwarrior]

The fact that bass have been caught in California approaching the mark set by Perry's World Record suggests that it IS POSSIBLE. However, a 22 lb 4 oz monster seems UNLIKELY without the protein base that has been created by California's trout stocking program. Perry's bass probably had the right genetics and conceivably it was a freak of nature that lived to maturity. Since there is no way of proving that he did not catch the fish and the documentation at the time was accepted, I think we have to give this record the benefit of the doubt.

[KU_Bassmaster.]

I personally think the record is  .  But I also think it's kind of cool that a hobbie or sport (whatever you want to call it ;D) that is known for "fish stories", has the biggest fish story of all time as the current world record.  It's like those big bass hunters in Cali are chasing a ghost everyday.  

[Triton_Mike]

Personally I don't think the World Record is legitimate.  My reasoning is this.  The 2nd biggest bass caught in Georgia is like 5lbs lighter than the World Record.  Atleast California has several fish in the 20lb range.  

T Mike

[RoLo]

T_Mike,

I have to agree.

It might well be a legitimate freak of nature (like the smallmouth discrepancy),

but I sure have my druthers.

Roger

[basspro48]

I think it is legit through and through, without it we wouldn't have that magical mark to shoot for.

[Rattletrap]

Anybody from Georgia not believing can vacate the state.  

The weight and measurements were taken, recorded and notarized in Helena, Georgia and Perry's only reward was seventy-five dollars in merchandise as first prize in Field and Stream Magazine's fishing contest. The longstanding record is one of the reasons that the largemouth bass was made Georgia's Official State Fish.

So Perry took his fish to the post office where, several hours after it was caught, the big female weighted 22 pounds 4 ounces and measured 31 inches long and 27 inches around.

[roadwarrior]

RoLo brings up a very interesting point. In order to produce a 22 lb 4 oz bass it seems that there should be a number of bass approaching that size and many +/- 20 lbs as we see in California. Following that same line of reasoning, there should be a number of smallmouth well over 11 lbs, the World Record being 11 lbs. 15 oz. In fact, there is only one...

There has NEVER been another smallmouth caught that has weighed 11 lbs.

[Rattlinrogue]

I think it is,but I also think there's one swimming around right now that's bigger.

[Rattletrap]

You catch one of those Cali bass loaded with Roe, and you're in the Dough!!!  ;D

[Rattletrap]

You catch one of those Cali bass loaded with Trout, and you've got the record, No Doubt!!!  ;D

[playmaker47]

I think the record is for real. The bass was recorded and weighed. Just because it hasnt been broken in 70+ years doesnt make it fake. Even though Georgia hasn't had bass that are in the 20 lb range doesnt mean there arent any of them out there that just havent been caught.

Some of you might think that this is the stupidest idea ever but i think that back when the record was caught in Georgia there was less fishing pressure as there is now, so fish could have gotten bigger, and there isnt the stress of tournaments on them.

[Rattletrap]

Cali can catch big bass like because they don't have stumps and pads to break them off. Who is to say that a Georgia angler has not had a 20lb plus fish break them off. :-?

[Lightninrod]

I think playmaker47 has the right idea; almost NO fishing pressure back then and just because no "20 lb" Bass has been caught in GA since then proves nothing.  There are Bass swimming around down here that no man has seen and having said that, I'll say that the next WRB will come from CA.  Those Trophy Bass hunters over there don't play around 8-)

Dan

[cart7t]

If I'm not mistaken, they've pulled floaters out of a couple of those Cali lakes that would've beaten the record.

At this point, it seems pretty silly to argue about the validity of a fish caught that long ago.  There's no way to disprove the validity of the measuring techniques nor Mr. Perry's story of the how's and why's of the catch.  I'm sure the record will eventually be broken, it nearly has been at least once.

[KYbass1276]

I beleve it's true I kinda think it's interesting that There were two other larger fish caught that Field and stream had evidence of a bigger fish caught in the 1880's weighing 23 pds and one eighth pounds and one caught in 1926 claiming to weigh 24pds  This info came from the oct issue of bassmaster mag page 37. I would have liked to been there when they made the decison to make perry's bass the record just for the reason I would like to know why they didn't consider the other two. one other thing it also says that  says that the spot where he caught it has silted in and resembles little more than a swamp today I still would like to see it anyway or atleast a picture of what the area looks like. I know that sounds weird but It's just interesting to me I like history

[ball_coach_1]

It's too dang perfect NOT to believe it.

You gotta believe.  It makes the sport better.

[earthworm77]

I have a hard time believing in this, the most sought after record, with no photographic proof. Why wouldn't those other fish be recognized? It would be nice to believe in, I just can't.

[BD]

I think it is, but I say so with a different approach. Remember our earth is 75% water. We have "searched" probably a 1/50 of that. We hear about loc ness, about new species that ACTUALLY are found sometimes, etc.

When we're fishing we are not really SURE what is in a particular body of water. I will give examples too.

My brother caught a 9lb bass in a GOLF course pond, that was MAYBE 25' x 25'. The deepest part was around 8 1/2'

The STATE BLUE CAT RECORD, was set at a lake in OK, I fish ALL the time, and I know there are cat's in there, but not 35.15, in a 20 acre lake, that only has 2 acres of it 'deep'.......with dang near NO cover!

There is a rentention pond here that houses another 8+ bass and it's even smaller size wise. How about when we hear of new striper records, or this WITH A VIDEO CLIP:

" This was killed on Lake Sam Rayburn,Angelina County, Texas a few weeks ago. It is a pending Lake Record and BAA World Record Alligator Garfish." It weighed 200 lbs!

http://mighty-hero.panicnow.net/GiantGatorGar.wmv

My simple point is, do we really know what is in our waters.........no way IMHO.

Plus without hardly any fishing pressure back then, a female bass could eat whatever she wanted to, and not be startled by weird sounds, etc.

At that same lake with the state blue cat, I fish, they SHOCKED up one that was 9.2. I personally saw someone catch a 8.5 on a jerkbait, and the study of this lake showed numerous fish over 6lb's.

Genetics, plus certain bass with serial killer traits........forget about it!

We would all die if we saw fish in our lakes we fish I truly believe that. Imagine the ones they shock up, and then imagine the ones they dont

[KYbass1276]

You have to look at it this way back then catching a world record bass wasn't on everyones top priority list as it is with todays fisherman.  If that fish would have been worth the money back then as it would be today I'm sure there would be more pictures than you can  count and there will be I'm sure when the record is broken.  Everyone here knows that when the next record bass is caught that person is going to be swamped with endorsment contracts and interveiws with magazine's and hard telling what else.  It totaly amazing to me that the lure company that produced the lure was even in business, how they managed to stay in business during the depression is beyond me.  IMO I think fishing back then was a way to catch food more than it was for sport or hobby, and if they had the booming economy that bass fishing has today it would have been different.  We all know that there was not disposable or digital camera's then and the ease of just taking a picture wasn't there.  In the bassmaster article it mentions in it that he sent a picture to the bait company It isn't all that surprising to me that that was probally the only picture taken and it was probally thrown away. In all honesty would would have known back then that  his fish's weight would stand as a record for 73 years. I really think if the money factor had been there like today's we wouldn't be debating this issue

[Captain Cali]

I have a hard time believing in this, the most sought after record, with no photographic proof. Why wouldn't those other fish be recognized? It would be nice to believe in, I just can't.

Exactly. They should have a huge asterik for no picture.  ;D

One would be laughed at today if they tried submitting a record bass now days with out a picture.

I wouldn't say I don't believe it but to me it's more of a myth. Bob Crupis' bass is more legit.

[BD]

Here is even more 'food for thought'.........mike long, and murphy etc etc catch these toads........a big number of these impoundments are fairly new.  if they can catch a 21'er, then why not CLOSE to Florida???

It's totally crazy (to me anyways) to count that record "out" If they can catch them that big WITH trout feeding etc, on a NEWLY made lake, who is to say that lake "y" in TN, that's been there for 30 years, doesn't house hawgs?

[playmaker47]

It was 1932. Pictures weren't readily availiable, and the ones that were taken probably weren't kept because a world record fish wasnt what everyone was chasing back then.

[earthworm77]

Playmaker, that's where I will disagree with you. I've done a ton of research on this "record". Perry told Creek Chub he had photos of the fish in his many letters to them requesting free baits. He seemed to be hellbent on getting his due for catching this fish, he knew how or attempted to play the system, so he was at least aware that there was some stake in this record and tried to benefit from it.

He was even quoted several times telling people he caught the fish on several different lures. The thing was that he never produced that photo. Any idea why? Because he never caught a 22lb 4oz bass. The only photo I have seen of Perry holding a fish was one of him and a good fish of about 10lbs. Perry didn't submit this fish for the record, Field and Stream did and it took about a year and a half to be recognized.

Take this a little further by considering the recent trashing of the World Record smallmouth by the IGFA and its sudden reinstatement. Now this fish was indeed legit, weighed and photographed but a feud between fish camp owners suggested there were discrepancies in the story. The only thing was that it was an issue that had nothing to do with the fish or the gent who caught it. This record was ultimately reinstated due to pressure and public outcry.

My question is this and it is the point why I made this post in the first place......how could the smallmouth record be tossed despite the steps taken to certify it and the largemouth record has not been challenged in light of the holes in that story? No photo? C'mon.

This isn't a Cali vs. Georgia thing, the story just doesn't jive. I'd love to see a photo and since Perry claimed to have them, why hasn't one ever surfaced.

Oh yeah, I caught a 40lb largemouth here in Florida on a golf course using a Chuck Woolery Moto lure. I have a photo but I'm not posting it, can I have my all tackle record please??? LOL.

[RoLo]

Well, it's fun kicking this around, but we'll never know for sure.

There are a few things however, that we do know for sure:

1. The Californian phenomenon was only possible through man's intervention, after Florida-strain bass

were transplanted outside thier natural range. Fine, but in 1932 there was no Florida-strain transplantation.

Indeed it is possible that Perry's bass was a Florida-strain bass, but Montgomery Lake, Georgia

is on the "northern edge" of their natural range.

2. We know for sure that record-fish certification was Very Sloppy back then.

The 69-lb, 15-oz world record Muskellunge stood for many years. Just before he died,

Len Hartman confessed to adding lead weight to his fish. His musky wasn't even close to 69-15.

The 25lb-0oz world-record walleye caught in Old Hickory Lake, TN was likewise struck down!

3. There is one other thing we know for sure, and I only learned this recently.

It's pretty obvious that everyone wants to believe that Perry's fish is legitimate (me too)

Roger