When fisheries say no bent hooks what exactly do they mean

In reply to Post #1
That's open for debate nowadays..
It used to be for the old bent hook rig where people bent a Long shank fly hook to create the kicker.

Here you go

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.carpfeeling.com%2Fcarptalk%2Fartikelen%2Fthe-effectiveness-of-carp-hooks&psig=AOvVaw3l0d6lLj6VpF9x5RbqOge3&ust=1581095176503000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCOjpv9S0vecCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAF

In reply to Post #1
A bent shank, generally a long shank hook with a bend put into the middle of the shank. You can't buy them anymore as far as I'm aware

In reply to Post #2
Great thanks its nothing to do with the hook or say a chod or blowback

In reply to Post #4
No nothing like that. They were all the rage for a short while way back, then people realised the awful damage they were causing and they were banned

In reply to Post #5
Good news thanks

In reply to Post #5
crikey it was a while back early nineties from memory

In reply to Post #7
Something like that mate, wasn't many years after I started

In reply to Post #5

It's been banned for a good 30 Odd years now and fish still have bad mouths

So
was it that?

In reply to Post #9
They were horrendous mate, caused lots of damage. These days there are various reasons imo. Inexperienced anglers, overly powerful rods, barbless hooks, and the fact that they simply get caught more due to how many people carp fish these days

In reply to Post #10
I was around and carp fishing during those times and even used the rig.
Can't ever remember damaging a fish with it myself.
But I was only fishing with Avon style ledger rods in those days.

In fact the only fish i have ever damaged that I landed was mid 10's using a barbless curve shank and double hooked it

What damage a hook pull/loosing a fish does though is a different kettle of fish as who knows until it's caught next time..

I think it was Rob Maylin did an article in one of the weeklies and sales of Kamasan fly hooks went through the roof! Partridge brought out a black painted pre bent hook shortly after as I recall.

In reply to Post #11
I was too mate, didn't use it myself but saw others who did and it definitely caused damage. The damage on one water in particular was incredibly noticeable too,that people were using bent hook rigs.

In reply to Post #13
Like you say people who don't know what they are re doing lol..

Tbh I can see why it would cause damage and why it was banned
When i heard about the damage People were reporting I stopped using it anyway just in case.

In reply to Post #12
They were marketed under Ritchies name.

In reply to Post #15
got a free pack with number 1 big carp mag..I used the Richie Mac ones a lot when they was about, and hand on heart they didn't do any mouth damage they was short shanked..the thin wired long shank ones was the culprits..hence Jim gibbinson forming the line aligner..

Partridge Grey Shadow range Z13



The Hutchinson was the forerunner of the chod hook but with a really exaggerated up-ey configuration.

God knows that KM was thinking of when he put his name to the Cassien pattern!

In reply to Post #10
Can barbless hooks be blamed there is an argument for and against ? Now thats a big can of worms

In reply to Post #18
Imo, yes they can (and many people agree)

In reply to Post #19
And many don't

In reply to Post #20
And many don't
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This.

In reply to Post #20
Thankfully, more are seeing these days, more venues are banning barbless

In reply to Post #22
And just as many are saying barbless only, and with good reason. This fish is from a barbed hook venue...



On the other hand, this is from a barbless only one...

In reply to Post #23
And there are cases the other way Ken. Go back not too many years and barbless hooks were never banned on a venue, these days they are banned on plenty. Why is that if they are the safest option? But this is a debate that has rumbled on for a while now and will continue to do so

In reply to Post #18
Now look what you've done lmao

In reply to Post #23
I've had barbless hook holds in the past that were never coming out, had to resort to the forceps so it works both ways

In reply to Post #23
That's your usual ******** analogy Ken and you know it. Any hook can cause damage due to the pot noodle with no idea and has jumped straight onto your present and previous sponsors hype bandwagon will show.

In reply to Post #22
What about micro bard hooks?

In reply to Post #22
There is an argument for both,for me if I could only fish one type it would be micro barbed.I have fished for years and not just carp,I started coarse fishing then onto sea fishing on boat and shore.I know how to unhook a fish but unfortunately there are people new to the sport who don't,so barbless might be safer for them and the fish

In reply to Post #28
Most "barbed" hooks now are micro barbed, and thats all I use. Best option by far imo

In reply to Post #29
Yeah newcomers who are learning I can see the benefits of barbless, unfortunately these are the same newcomers who are likely to be pulling way too hard playing fish and causing damage too, and the extra movement barbless have just causes more damage. I guess the problem is worse now as most don't learn to fish for small stuff first, jumping straight into carp fishing

In reply to Post #27
...and has jumped straight onto your present and previous sponsors hype bandwagon will show.

WTF are you talking about! What has the barbed/barbless debate got anything to do with Haiths...? I think the underworld is having a bad effect on your brain Bernard.

I have been using barbless hooks since 1985 and never fish a venues that insists that the angler must use barbed. I must have caught thousands of carp since then and I can back up my findings with 35 years experience.

Barbless: They go in easier and the come out easier. It's a no brainer in my humble opinion.

In reply to Post #32
I respect your stance on this Ken... but why are you so against barbed hooks? Refusing to fish barbed only waters is a bit strong is it not?

Imo barbless hooks can, and do cause damage in various ways... slippage etc.

The only reason a barbed hook would ever cause more damage is if someone physically ripped it out of the fish's mouth. Imagine the force you'd need to use to cause that damage... surely people don't do that?!? And if they do they're clearly not anglers and would cause damage with whatever they used.
Someone of your experience Ken would never cause damage by taking out a barbed hook so what makes you so anti?

There's way too many factors to consider for anyone to every come to a solid conclusion on this.
During my fisheries work days the barbless only waters were 1000 x worse for mouth damage.
I did a lot of nettings/surveys over those years and it was consistent throughout.

Perhaps those waters had a less experienced conglomerate of anglers fishing them?
Perhaps the fish were caught more often?
Who knows but the difference between barbed and barbless waters was blatantly
obvious.

In reply to Post #33
Barbed or Barbless its a true statement its down to the angler to take care of how they treat and respect the fish no matter how often the fish are caught.

In reply to Post #33
I totally concur with what you have said. The worse hook hold I ever witnessed with a caught fish trailing was with a small LSC barbless hook with an inturned eye which had basically gone through so many times it had stitched the fish's mouth up.

Micro barb take a bit more pulling in however dont "keep going' as described above. I would wager most mouth damage is caused by tethering up and not during a fight. In such case a fish battling against a resistance would benefit from the hook not penetrating too far.

Barbless may well go in and out easier but in my experience having something to stop them going in too far is the best solution.

If i may also add my twopeneth..

Modern rod trends mean that they are incapable of causing mouth damage because they are too stiff and offer far to much leverage for the fish to work against us and no power on the hookpoint to drive it in. What you feel / observe at the angler end in a grimace and a strain is nothing going out the other as far as the fish is concerned..
Total fallacy that stiff rods and lack of experience cause mouth damage.!!

A 13ft stiffish rod will cause you to yield with less than 3.5lb of pressure applied. Carp with hard mouths may take more than 4lb of pressure to set the hook. Then we wonder why we get hookpuls..

I must say, I can't recall ever double hooking or causing damage with a bent hook, but I only used them for lakes with fish over 15lb. Also, if the hook was deeply embedded, I would cut the hook shank and feed the point through, and I still do the same with any hook now, although now I do use line aligners.

I have fished barbless only waters where the carp had terrible mouth damage, usually hooked by pole and/or match anglers, who tried to give the carp as much welly as possible to get them in for a big match weight.
Same with barbed waters.

As an add, do carp that get regularly hooked get more mouth damage than those that rarely get hooked?
On either barbed or barbless hooks?
There are also some fish with deformed mouthes due to genetics or whatever, even without being hooked damage.

the original bent hook was thought of as a big fish only rig/hook..wasnt it the savay anglers that thought it up?was wrote about in tiger bay, then the masses once it was out took it to runs waters,totaly different kind of fish and the way they fight..doubles etc, fast darting runs/fights..I only ever used the Richie Mac ones straight out the packet and caught fish down to 5lb in weight and hook was smack bang in the centre of middle lip, no damage.i still put the reason why it got banned in its original form down to long shank thin wire..the barbless/barbed debate..my 2 syndies,one bans barbless hooks the other barbed hooks..out the 2 the barbed only water all fishes mouths are mint..the barbless water some fish do have mouth damage, mainly the low 20s,the 40s and the 50plus don't show any damage, only the normal bruising...(edit). we need scear unbanned,i would like to know his stance on this, don't know him personally but he knew his onions and seemed to be in the cv at the time the bent hook came about..

In reply to Post #37
No the bent hook was devised by secret Jon on longfield (Fox pool) to trip up the ultra cute very large carp that were backing off with bait in the mouth & across the lips to feel for hooklink resistance and drop the rig.

In reply to Post #35
Free spirit did a comparison with low test curve rods and higher tc rods and more pressure was applied with a lower tc rod.

The video is on you tube
It has lee Jackson in it And I think it was Alan taylor

Firstly to the OP it's probably better to contact the club and ask for clarification on their idea of a bent hook, stops you possibly getting into trouble.

The bent hook was a wonderful hooking arrangement but was bettered by the large curved shank hook, I used both extensively and caused no mouth damage, only using short 4-6 inch hook links with semi-fixed leads.

These days you can do the same with shrink tube or stiff link materials, the chod is basically the same as the 1/0's I used to use.

Regarding fish mouth damage, the old cheese-wire braid was terrible and I also agree with the poster about fish being tethered causing terrible damage.

I will add that years ago fishing 10 inch braided hook-links with critically balanced baits I hooked the fish to far back and caused 2 bad tears to the softer part of the mouth. While a shortening of the hook link solved the issue it shows that even an effective rig can cause issues just by it's length, I start short these days and go from there.

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.

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.

In reply to Post #41
nail on the head

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
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 #45
See you ignored post 33.....

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..

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 #48
Nice cop out....

In reply to Post #48

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 #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 #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 #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 #54
There is certainly good and bad points to both types but the main issue is the angler imo