|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #54
There is certainly good and bad points to both types but the main issue is the angler imo
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #53
Thing is mate he's never actually explained his thinking. Can't agree with the venues thing either, not totally anyway. The single worst mouth damage I've ever seen was at burghfield gold pool, which is lake exclusive booking and not really a novice water and surprise surprise its barbless only. More and more are banning them these days, can't be all wrong can we??!!
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #52
I just think like Ken says it's been done to death,for me there is a place for both types of hooks.Runs waters with new instant carp anglers barbless,well run waters with good bailiffs doing checks then micro barb is fine.Millbrook fishery is a place that are micro barbed but they are spot on with fishcare and who is on there so fish are immaculate.Then you have somewhere like Drayton Reservoir hooks being ripped out,no care or toss given by most on there and the fish look terrible.They have mouths so badly deformed its amazing they can still feed 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #51
I know that Tony, but matey in post 33 puts a great case across and asked to Ken explain his, and as usual he can't. The idea of debate is to reason, not just state their opinion as fact and then ignore all others.
The guy you mention is clearly a knob, that's down to him, not a hook
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #49
You feel strongly about barbed,Ken feels strongly about barbless it's just a matter of opinion.All I know is the waters I fish with the barbless rule the fish are in much better condition around the mouth than barbed hook waters.There are too many instant carp anglers who do not have a clue how to unhook fish.I watched a guy once wrap his rig around his hand to rip the hook out,I stopped him just in time,imagine how damaged that fish would have been.His excuse,he could not get it out(barbed hook only water)
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #48
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #48
Nice cop out....
|
|
|
|
This subject has been done to death. It is never, ever resolved to anyone's satisfaction. I have had my say, you have had yours. We shall never agree so in this instance can we agree to disagree?
I thus cede the field.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #46
Usual tactics mate. He's already admitted in that roundabout way of his that barbed don't do the damage that barbless can do.. 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #45
See you ignored post 33.....
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #41
That tiny little slither of a barb makes sod all difference in the real world in terms of whether you land the fish or not.
The only difference it makes is on extraction, where it will come out easier and leave less damage, that’s it.
Mouth damage has virtually nothing to do with hook barbs unless you screw up the extraction.
And...breath. Nuff said...Lock thread! 
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #41
Interesting point keebs about people just picking up the rod.
I posed a question on here about whether people struck runs anymore, having watch some old footage of Kevin maddocks striking every run he had.
From memory most said “don’t bother” or “no need too”.
Most people wouldn’t dream of not “setting the hook” when pikefishing. But I suppose most will say that pike have boney mouths so you have to set the hook.
As most carp anglers are using, self hooking rigs, it’s easy to imagine that most would assume that the hook is well in when a run occurs.
I listened to a carp cast where Frank Warwick was recommending the use of 4oz plus as we don’t strike takes like matchmen do.
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #41
nail on the head
|
|
|
|
In reply to Post #41
I must admit I never thought of what you say about the fish not hooked proper it does make sense and must contribute to fish mouth damage.
|
|
|
|
From observing other anglers on the bank, 2 things become quite obvious.
1. Most people, when they get a run just pick up the rod and start playing the fish as if it is already properly hooked. 9 times out of 10 it isn’t!
2. Most people these days use rods of 3lb TC or more.
With the hook point just a few mm into the flesh you can bring the fish quite close to you with a stiff rod because the stretch in the long line will be buffering the lunges and not much pressure is on the point to make it do anything other than stay where it is.
When the line stretch is minimised by distance - that’s the danger time.
Barbed or barbless, if that hook hasn’t been pulled in properly, at some point in the fight as the fish gets nearer and more pressure is finally exerted on the hook point, you are 50/50 either going to get lucky and pull the hook in, or get unlucky and scud the thing across the flesh and lose it.
Think about it - how often do you hear “I lost it at the net” - “I got it all the way in then the hook pulled”
Hooks that are in to the bend, right from the off, do not “pull”, barbed or barbless.
Softer rods do help in 2 ways - first off being able to exert more pressure at the fish end is more likely to pull the hook fully home, secondly the buffer effect is higher on a short line.
If you pull the hook home proplerly in the first place, being fully aware of the limitations of whatever tackle you’re using, then you will rarely lose a fish, regardless off how stiff your rod is or how far out you are fishing. With a stiff rod obviously you will need a looser clutch on a short line.
Plenty of experienced anglers do land fish well on heavy gear so obviously it is possible to compensate correctly for the gear.
The trouble is - the inexperienced are also convinced they need the same gear
That tiny little slither of a barb makes sod all difference in the real world in terms of whether you land the fish or not.
The only difference it makes is on extraction, where it will come out easier and leave less damage, that’s it.
Mouth damage has virtually nothing to do with hook barbs unless you screw up the extraction.
|
|
Rigs