World record bass a phony.....

[Mattlures]

Yes George but death does not make a man honest either.

I will add this one little tidbit.

While Perry was alive, Ray Scott (founder of bass) sent a guy to do a polygraph test on Perry. Do you think he took the test? No

Does that prove he was lying? No

interesting though.

[flipin4bass]

Hannon an expert fisherman?? Tell him, Charlie Moore, and the Blue Dolphin to come down here and I'll smoke em. You can moan and groan all you want, the record stands.

[cart7t]

Yes George but death does not make a man honest either.

I will add this one little tidbit.

While Perry was alive, Ray Scott (founder of bass) sent a guy to do a polygraph test on Perry. Do you think he took the test? No

Does that prove he was lying? No

interesting though.

Will one of you CA guys please, legitimately catch a 22lb 5oz bass and end this thing?

Seriously.  The world record bass was caught 77 years ago.  It was a whole different time and place.  Those questioning the record the most, youngsters by and large,  can't even begin to wrap their brains around what times were like back then and why the scenario took place in regards to this record fish.  I mean really, the guy got a whole fishin rod and reel out of the deal... whoopie.. it wasn't even a dobyns with a steez mounted on it.  

[Eddie Munster]

Personally I can't believe Perry didn't take it to the nearest Bass Pro Shops to try to make some real money on it. Obviously a hoax.  :

[Hannons Hound]

[edit]I doubt very highly Hannon is jealous of Perry's fish, I personally think he's frustrated that this supposed record fish set the bar with poor records or concrete proof. It's only a matter of time before Mike Long legitimately sets the new record. [/edit]

[Paul Roberts]

I never gave the issue much thought, until someone on this board mentioned that Perry's fish was caught outside the floridanus' range!!!

This would make Perry's Georgia fish a northern strain bass. The largest northern LM I'm aware of (correct me if I'm wrong) was a 15.5lb caught in a MA pond. Northern strain bass aren't even in the race.

[NYfishwow]

Its nice pic but if theres more reasons to call it a phony then any ounce of proof then its must be a phony. When i look at it more it does look like a 10 lb fish then 15 lb bass. not really human nature but common sense. It would be human nature to say its a 22 lb fish. Where are all the other  20 lbs bass from Georgia, i met some people from Georgia caught 9-10 lb fish but never seen another 20 lb fish ever!

Is there any other record of 20 lb fish ever caught in Georgia other then Perry's fish? really?

[Catt]

In 1932 the world record bass meant little to anyone outside of maybe Field & Stream who at the time were putting on the contest in which Perry's bass was entered. According to the contest rules, Perry had the fish's dimensions and weight notarized which in my personal option validates the record.

We keep trying place modern standards to something that took place 77 years ago while we should be keeping mind the standards of the era. In 1932 not every one and their brothers owned or even had access to a camera so it would not be surprising there are no pictures.

I here a lot of talk about Perry's bass was a northern strain and could not have been of this size yet he won the "Field & Stream" contest again in 1934 with a 13 pound 14 ounce large-mouth. How can one say definitely the bass was not Florida strain some 77 years later?

[rippin_lips]

Another point on the picture:  Perry went fishing that day because it was raining too hard to work the fields.  By the shadows in the picture, it definitely was sunny when the picture was taken.

Does that disprove the record, no.  

I think someone will grow the next world record.  Either genetically (Texas) or on a private pond.

[ROCbass]

I dont know if I believe it or not but I hate it when somebody posts that picture and says "here is the pic with Perry's bass"

THATS NOT PERRY IN THE PICTURE !!!!!!!! tHERE IS ABSOLUTLEY NO PROOF THAT IS PERRY'S FISH. PERIOD!!!!!! Somebody found that pic when their aunt died and suposedly she knew some of Perry's relatives so they make the huge leap and assume that is Perry fish. I repeat, that is not Perry in the picture!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Nor has that picture evr been authenticated.

If it's not Perry then who is it? Unless you know who it is how can you say who it isn't?

[BigBassGuy]

I dont know if I believe it or not but I hate it when somebody posts that picture and says "here is the pic with Perry's bass"

THATS NOT PERRY IN THE PICTURE !!!!!!!! tHERE IS ABSOLUTLEY NO PROOF THAT IS PERRY'S FISH. PERIOD!!!!!! Somebody found that pic when their aunt died and suposedly she knew some of Perry's relatives so they make the huge leap and assume that is Perry fish. I repeat, that is not Perry in the picture!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Nor has that picture evr been authenticated.

If it's not Perry then who is it? Unless you know who it is how can you say who it isn't?

Read this story and then tell me if you think its Perry or not.

http://sports.espn.go.com/outdoors/bassmaster/news/story?page=b_fea_Perrys_bass_060706

[Tucson]

OK, I'm going to put an end to this.  I'm going fishing tomorrow and I'll catch a legit 23 lber, have it notarized, polarized, xygloed, magnafluxed and X-rayed.  Then the debate will be over.  

Man, I gotta do everything myself!  

[dodgeguy]

it amazes me that a guy in 1932 could have a fish weighed and notarized but we don't believe it!!!he did what the requirements were at that time.it's like saying that other events in history never happened either because we don't have photographic evidence.that would be obviously absurd.let the record stand.btw i personally feel that 25 lber in california should have counted.hooked on the outside of the mouth proves the fish went for the bait.it also proves perry's fish was possible.there are also fish people never catch that may be even bigger.over here in ny we have the nyc reservoir system.state police practice scuba diving in these reservoirs.there are reports of huge trout that sit on the bottom .there are reports of plenty of huge bass also.huge fish don't get big by getting caught.just because others haven't caught fish this size doesn't mean they don't exist.i fish a pond close to my house where i catch nothing but dinks under 12 inches.one day i pulled a 6 pounder out.this fish was roughly 6 times the weight of the others so i guess it didn't exist!!!

[CODbasser]

does anyone know what perry caught the fish on?? just curious 8-)

[CatBassin]

I can't remember what kind of lure it was, but I do know it was the only one he had. It tells in the book "Sowbelly" but I just can't remember what it was. I also recommend reading this book, it gives some interesting information and is quite enjoyable.

[FishingPirate]

They sell the modernized version of the lure at DICKS. I think its a creek chub or something. Basically its just a 5-6 inch double-jointed wooden swimbait. I think thats what it is, someone better educted in fishing lore might have to step in here though.

[Wayne P.]

Do any of you remember the HOT bass lake a few years ago that had 30# bass in it that were either speared or netted, but no one had caught one that could be counted as a world record due to the method?

http://honduras.com/hondurastips/english/lakeyojoa.htm

[Jake.]

does anyone know what perry caught the fish on?? just curious 8-)

A Creek Chub Fintail Shiner.

[South FLA]

We can all debate this or that, but in the end the record stands!

I respect and admire Doug Hannon, although lately it seems he has becoming a bit Roland Martinish in his promotion, but he has achieved that through years of on and in the water time!

As far as the next world record, to get it straight we should have to

1. Weighed/Measured on a certified scale/tape

2. Documented via photograph

3. Have it genetically tested to verify strain info (hybrid strain,  Florida strain, Northern strain)

4. Have location revealed of where it was caught

5. Have the fisherman/woman who caught the record take a lie detector test, regarding how he caught the fish and whether it was foul hooked or not, or if tampered with the fish in any form.

6. If the fish was caught outside its natural range or limitations. If not it should be noted that the record bass is not a natural occurrence in the area and potential reasons for unnatural weight.

(i.e. Caught in private cool water pond where genetic hybrid fish were feed a diet of high protein tilipia and trout, or caught in California where the trout stocking programs and cool temperatures has allowed bass to grow to huge proportions, or caught in S. Africa on a private lake, landowner admitted to selective breeding as well as genetic modification to provide record bass with optimum environment, etc.)

The point is that there will always be controversy over a world record largemouth bass.  Everyone will have an opinion of why or why not the record should or shouldn't stand. Even if the world record is folklore, a bigger bass was caught in California.  

I would actually like to see a "Natural" record book where only genetically tested fish caught in natural range under natural settings would count, but that is just me call me MONK!  

[JDPgator]

Yes George but death does not make a man honest either.

I will add this one little tidbit.

While Perry was alive, Ray Scott (founder of bass) sent a guy to do a polygraph test on Perry. Do you think he took the test? No

Does that prove he was lying? No

interesting though.

Matt, I do not think your post is fair. You choose not to believe it the record I have zero issues with that. I personally could care less if the record is valid or not because it will never impact my like, but to say that because Perry elected not to take a polygraph test somehow casts doubt is just wrong.

Did Scott disclose to Perry that a polygraph was going to be part of the interview? If he did not fully disclose the intentions of the interview process at the very least it would be human nature to feel like you were being forced to prove your innocence.

If someone were to pull a stunt like that on my 84 year old grandfather from Cordele, GA they would be lucky to only get thrown out on their backside and I would bet good money that a shotgun would be at least seen.

[Mattlures]

I was just pointing out a fact. I did not say he was lying. Perry wasnt that old at the time Ray Scott wanted the test Perry died at 61. Perry not taking the test does not make him guilty. It is possible that he was insulted. I wasnt there. I wish he would have taken the test though. It might have cleared up things one way or another. I honestly dont know how I feel about the record. One day I think its a lie and another day I think it maybe legit. I have wrapped my head around it many times and I have for the most part let it go. The article suporting the picture is rediculous. They clam the picture is legit by two palm trees in the background. Now if there was a building then that would be believable. I could go on and on and write a 10000 word post with a ton of evidence against the record, but I dont want to. In the end I am still not 100% possative.

How do I know thats not Perry in the pic? well because its not. Perry was much younger then that at the time and there are plenty of pictures of Perry and thats not him. Am I saying that not Perry's fish? No I am not because it could be. All I am saying is that nobody knows who the people are in the pic. And they are just geussing at where the picture was taken. It could be legit but it is far from fact or proof.

Here is a real picture of Perry. He submitted this fish and won the Field and stream prize again. Acording to Perry and Field and stream this fish weighed an incredible 13lbs 14oz

Yes George but death does not make a man honest either.

I will add this one little tidbit.

While Perry was alive, Ray Scott (founder of bass) sent a guy to do a polygraph test on Perry. Do you think he took the test? No

Does that prove he was lying? No

interesting though.

Matt, I do not think your post is fair. You choose not to believe it the record I have zero issues with that. I personally could care less if the record is valid or not because it will never impact my like, but to say that because Perry elected not to take a polygraph test somehow casts doubt is just wrong.

Did Scott disclose to Perry that a polygraph was going to be part of the interview? If he did not fully disclose the intentions of the interview process at the very least it would be human nature to feel like you were being forced to prove your innocence.

If someone were to pull a stunt like that on my 84 year old grandfather from Cordele, GA they would be lucky to only get thrown out on their backside and I would bet good money that a shotgun would be at least seen.

[Triton_Mike]

Its nice pic but if theres more reasons to call it a phony then any ounce of proof then its must be a phony. When i look at it more it does look like a 10 lb fish then 15 lb bass. not really human nature but common sense. It would be human nature to say its a 22 lb fish. Where are all the other 20 lbs bass from Georgia, i met some people from Georgia caught 9-10 lb fish but never seen another 20 lb fish ever!

Is there any other record of 20 lb fish ever caught in Georgia other then Perry's fish? really?

Randall would know more than I would but I believe the next biggest Georgia bass to Perry's fish was 17lbs 9oz.  A good long way from 22lbs.  Thats just one of many reasons why I don't buy Perry's fish as the World Record. I follow along with Mattlures and Fish Chris train of thought.

[Triton_Mike]

I can't remember what kind of lure it was, but I do know it was the only one he had. It tells in the book "Sowbelly" but I just can't remember what it was. I also recommend reading this book, it gives some interesting information and is quite enjoyable.

NiceBass,  I hate to tell you this but Monte Burke the author of Sowbelly is a fraud just trying to create a soap opera.  Mike Long threw him out of his boat when he found out his intentions.  Take what you read in Sow Belly with a grain of salt.

Mike

[ROCbass]

I agree that most of the evidence suggests it is not Perry in the picture, but until there is a positive ID of who it is it could still be anybody, Perry included, especially taking into consideration the quality of the picture and the fact that the man's face is shadowed and hard to make out. I just think it is strange that people are so quick to say its not Perry, yet no one knows for sure because no one knows for sure who it is.

[Fishwhittler]

1. George Perry's fish was definitely a very large fish.

2. It is impossible to definitely judge the size of the fish based on the picture.

3. George Perry's fish COULD have been 22 lbs.

Just my two cents worth.

Fishwhittler