Speak to people who fish/fished Carpathia or Farlows 
Surely you do have to question why these enormous bumper catches have stopped happening
Surely you do have to question why these enormous bumper catches have stopped happening
In reply to Post #221
Literally some in this thread but I doubt you bothered reading it being too busy fanboying
Literally some in this thread but I doubt you bothered reading it being too busy fanboying
In reply to Post #223
🤡🤡
🤡🤡
Hormones
The new covid or brexit..
The new covid or brexit..
In reply to Post #218
If you were accused of using hormones, but you weren't - you were in fact simply angling well, on lots of fish, in the right conditions - and you hauled 30-40 carp in 24-36 hours.
If someone made an allegation afterwards on social media, that you were cheating by using hormones when you were not, what "evidence" would you use to clear your name?
If you were accused of using hormones, but you weren't - you were in fact simply angling well, on lots of fish, in the right conditions - and you hauled 30-40 carp in 24-36 hours.
If someone made an allegation afterwards on social media, that you were cheating by using hormones when you were not, what "evidence" would you use to clear your name?
In reply to Post #226
Not sure any “angling well” will congregate fish in a featureless swim that's normally a “no hoper” when other equally talented anglers are fishing either side.
And there are ways of getting hormones in the water without injecting carp. Don't you remember those “Phermone X” sprays you could get in the back of the Sunday Sport to arttact the birds? It even work for Richie and Eddie.......
Not sure any “angling well” will congregate fish in a featureless swim that's normally a “no hoper” when other equally talented anglers are fishing either side.
And there are ways of getting hormones in the water without injecting carp. Don't you remember those “Phermone X” sprays you could get in the back of the Sunday Sport to arttact the birds? It even work for Richie and Eddie.......
In reply to Post #216
You're speaking here as if what you are saying is fact. It is not.
You're speaking here as if what you are saying is fact. It is not.
I think this is all now over.
Time to move on.
Time to move on.
In reply to Post #226
If it was as simple as spodding some hormones into a lake mixed in with bait, do you not think that the cat would have been out of the bag a long time ago, and we'd still be sat here with vague stories and unsubstantiated rumours?
Do you not think, all things considered - that if it was that easy, lakes all over the place would be getting emptied by pub-chuckers.
The only place this is happening, is on social media - by people talking nonsense.
If it was as simple as spodding some hormones into a lake mixed in with bait, do you not think that the cat would have been out of the bag a long time ago, and we'd still be sat here with vague stories and unsubstantiated rumours?
Do you not think, all things considered - that if it was that easy, lakes all over the place would be getting emptied by pub-chuckers.
The only place this is happening, is on social media - by people talking nonsense.
In reply to Post #228
You're more than welcome to correct me.
You're more than welcome to correct me.
In reply to Post #230
Might be because the substance in question is tightly controlled and not on sale to the general public unless you back door it in from abroad where regulations are broken often. Which was actually one of the initial claims. It was mainly about euro anglers and being imported.
You think it's not true but you can't categorically say it isn't happening. Others think it has/still is been used but they can't categorically say it is.
The ones accused haven't actually flat out said they haven't, just given vague and contradictory statements. The ones that claim to know of it happening haven't been bold enough to name names directly.
People of course are allowed their own opinions.
Might be because the substance in question is tightly controlled and not on sale to the general public unless you back door it in from abroad where regulations are broken often. Which was actually one of the initial claims. It was mainly about euro anglers and being imported.
You think it's not true but you can't categorically say it isn't happening. Others think it has/still is been used but they can't categorically say it is.
The ones accused haven't actually flat out said they haven't, just given vague and contradictory statements. The ones that claim to know of it happening haven't been bold enough to name names directly.
People of course are allowed their own opinions.
In reply to Post #231
Do you have the evidence it doesn't work being added to a carrier like soil?
Do you have the evidence it doesn't work being added to a carrier like soil?
In reply to Post #233
That's why all of the sudden it needs injecting into a fish to get it to work.
Someone else pointed out it can be absorbed through the skin, so if it's in the water column it will be injested. But that spoils the narrative.
That's why all of the sudden it needs injecting into a fish to get it to work.
Someone else pointed out it can be absorbed through the skin, so if it's in the water column it will be injested. But that spoils the narrative.
if this was worms ( Big If) what quantity and more to the point what cost would this be to the angler in the quantity required to get this reaction and where they be storing the quantities when on the bank.
A kilo of chopped worm goes nowhere.
A kilo of chopped worm goes nowhere.
So to sum up.......no proof, no names and no actual substance name.......we may as well go Back to discussing the best bivvy........ 