whats your opnion

[matt duarte]

hey guys how it going. im just in aw about all the different types and styles of baits i see on here, from a sucker fish to a top water igauna all i can say is simply amazing! also with the paint jobs i see on here some times its hard to tell the real from the fake:worship:

i was wondering your guys opnion on what you think makes the bait, "THE BAIT".....detail,shape,size,micro fiber tails. whats more important..to you

like on my baits i like a smooth body (no scales, gills,mouths) i just became fond the the micro fiber tails (but in my case harbor freight paint burshes) on the tail only and a elementry school paint job like the triple trout

i think its more of the reaction of the bait and the size that catches the fishes eye, and not so much the paint,scales gills ect... dont get me wrong though i think those that can pull it off its amazing i just dont think the fish pay attention to it as much as other things..

some of the baits i see on here id be afraid to toss them they look so beautiful. my hats off to those that get down and dirty with that:worship:

[diemai]

@ matt duarte

I guess , that this could turn out quite an interesting thread , for I am certain , that there would be so many different opinions around:yes: !

One should think , that the closest resemblances of real living prey would be the best producers , but I have learnt , that if fish are absolutely unwilling to strike on lures , they would ignore these 100% lookalikes as well:yes: .

Often such happened to me in my favourite water , and as soon as I switched to dead minnows(even frozen ones) rigged on a so-called "Drachkovitch"-harness(cast and retrieved just like a plastic shad) , I caught zander (European walleye)again .

Many years ago my wife and me have caught a lot of perch on several trips to some of our bigger lakes in the vicinity , fishing close to bottom from a boat over up to approx. 65 feet of water , each one of us fished one lure rod with a jigging spoon and/or small grubs , in addition one rod with a float set-up and night crawlers and little minnows as bait .

The vast majority of perch went for the bait , not for the lures:yes: !

Off course lures , that look very close to the real thing , should be more likely to fool a predator than others , but why do they also go for lures , that are painted in bright yellow , pink or purple....etc . , colors , that are hardly to be seen in nature ?

Or is it all a myth about certain colors being stated as good producers for certain species:huh: ?

There was an article once in a German magazine about "redhead" paint designs , these were said to be very good catchers for perch and pike .

There was a statement saying that if , like in this case , a certain lure color or design/model is getting enough promotion either by the media or just fishermen's chat , more and and people would tie it on and thus more fish would be caught on it !

But I've also once heard from a friend , that in the Netherlands(I am sure , elsewhere , too) good catching lure models/colors might get "burned" after one season or two , simply because in the Netherlands they strictly practice CPR , at least for pike , so a kind of "learning effect" of the pike would occur !

Sooner or later they would consider those certain models/colors to be "dangerous"(at least not edible)and totally ignore them .

And why is it , that there are some time-proven lure models around , that are not the closest resemblances of live prey , and they still do catch lots of fish , even since up to 100 years:? !

I'm talking 'bout lures like the German "Effzett" and "Heintz" spoons(very similar models are called "Proffessor" or "Doctor" spoon) , the old "Eppinger Daredevle" , the French "Mepps" spinner , also the "Creek Chub Pikie" and the famous "Heddon Spook" , just to name a few !

I believe , that such lures just have the right moves and action just to perfectly trigger the bite reflex or feeding frenzy of their target predators species , therefore they might even outfish modern lures on ocassion, that are perfect resemblances of live prey .

At least , when those "odtimers" haven't gotten "burned" before in that particular swim !

Another issue about my lure choice is their features , not so much the colors or maybe even their action .

Often fishing from the bank I need to cast my lures as far as possible , so even the best lifelike crank ,-or jerkbait won't suit me too much like the old tarnished spoon does , that I can cast twice as far !

Anyway , just a few thoughts of mine , but we would never know for sure , which lures are best , perfectly detailed resemblances or simple pieces of wood or metal , unless fish would finally learn to talk to us !

greetz , diemai

Edited December 11, 2008 by diemai

[BobP]

I was reading a Bass Times article on fish learning that indicates bass can learn to associate particular lures and colors with getting hooked. But there are differences among individual bass in how fast they learn and how long they retain the lesson. So there are "smart" fish and "dumb" fish. Most bass seem to forget negative conditioning after several months but some retain it longer, possibly for life. Fishing experience seems to support this in a way. A new bait comes out that catches bass better than others. After a year or two, the "new bait" loses its advantage. Meanwhile, old classic baits that haven't seen much use lately start to work again because the bass have forgotten to be wary of them. I think regardless of fish learning, good baits will always have some success because predators have to eat and their aggressiveness can overcome learned avoidance behavior, especially if the fish has a territorial versus feeding reaction to it. And there will always be a few slow learners and quick forgetters around around.

Matt, I think you make a valid point about realism but I think it may add that extra few percent of fish attraction that's important sometimes. I also think it can be taken to an unproductive extreme. Maybe realism is the wrong term for baits that catch fish. Who knows exactly what "realistic features" a fish perceives? Nobody! We might be better off thinking in terms of "feeding cues". Size, depth, action, colors, color pattern, vibration may all be important or unimportant depending on the circumstance. We have only our own experience to lean on when we guess which cues need to be included in a crankbait. And those cues have to be incorporated in a bait so that it can be fished practically. Not a simple job!

Edited January 15, 2009 by BobP