Support Iceshanty... Get some great gear and forum goodies... Join The Iceshanty Hardwater Militia
Great experiment! I appreciate the scientific approach. I found similar results back in a 2016 experiment. I got nearly twice the flags for fluoro.
I'd say there's nothing scientific about it. Nothing. As I replied in his duplicate post on the Mass board, I respect his efforts and opinions but this is nothing more than anecdotal observation. I'll not double up here as you can see my reasoning on that other post.https://www.iceshanty.com/ice_fishing/index.php?topic=376635.msg4069099#msg4069099
Just curious then, in your opinion, what would classify as "scientific"? The "process" of scientific investigation, includes generating a hypothesis, predictions, conducting an experiment, collecting data, and coming to a conclusion based on the data. Papa came up with an experiment, and collected data. It's up to you how you want to interpret the results. I agree it wasn't the most perfectly controlled experiment (lots of variables that weren't fixed), so there can be some problems with interpretation. But I applaud the effort to test something that might improve success rates for others. It's up to you how you want to interpret the results. In the end, it's whatever each angler is comfortable with, and whatever you think gives you the advantage!
Wait a minute, and let me grab a fresh cup of cawfee!!!
Science would require controls in the experiment design. If conclusions are to be valid when investigating a single factor all other factors must be controlled or (at the very least) their input minimized as much as possible. When there are so many uncontrolled factors present in fishing success to make a conclusion on an (self) admittedly skewed experiment such as this is not really any kind of experiment at all much less scientific. I mentioned some of the other variables in the sister post but I'm sure there are many more. Additional problems arise when unrecognized factors have an overshadowing effect on the experiment where, if not accounted for, can lead to completely wrong conclusions. Please do not mistake this for a knock on Papa pr his efforts, it is nothing more pointing out what is/is not science or an experiment by accepted definition.As a career process improvement guy that's had a good amount of experience in Design of Experiments this is nowhere near able to provide any significant conclusion except that Papa likes to to fish, is a curious guy and is willing to share his opinions/actions with other like minded individuals. Which really is a good thing... Again, I also respect his efforts as I do much the same really every time I hit the water. The question begs what's next? If I flip a quarter and it comes up heads does not mean that a flipped coin always (or almost) comes up heads. I still play with fluoro despite my personal preferences. My problem is when a one off experience (not experiment) suddenly becomes accepted as the one true answer. It is not. Because lots of folks embrace results that align with their beliefs it becomes a self-fulfilling "superstitious dance" of sorts. It's kinda human nature to accept ideas we agree with and reject ideas that we do not. The hard part is staying objective. I've never said that steel is always better than fluoro. Only that, when targeting pike/muskies, it is much more cut resistant than any other choice.Yes, I wholeheartedly agree: "In the end, it's whatever each angler is comfortable with, and whatever you think gives you the advantage!" Fishing without confidence has you second guessing and often leads to switching options too often actually reducing chances of success. I have, however, quit trying to enlighten those that use any kind of superline for a pike/musky leader. That seems to be a losing battle.And yes, this can often be one of those "gonna grab the Jiffy Pop" topics.
And I'll buy the first round of popcorn. Butter or no? Or is that another thread?
I've run similar tests, but steel numbers were better for me than this one here. Note that I was using 30 lb steel line, vs 40 lb fluoro, both with quick strike rigs. They ended up almost even, with a very slight edge to fluoro. Have never been bit off to date with either.As a side note, I stay away from that knot2kinky garbage. Lost to trophies on a open water trip to Northern Quebec because of it, never again.
What happened with the knot2kinky? I have been using that exclusively for 4 years after trying 60# fluoro (with crimps) and 30# fluoro. I have to be careful when I tie the wire to make sure the knot tightens properly. I grab the swivel and hook with pliers and pull until the wire stretches. Never had a field failure and I've pulled in some 5 pound pike with at least 15 pounds of weeds... that's the same as a northern Quebec trophy right???
Every day on the water is an experience. Most of those days for me involve some sort of impromptu "experiment" where strict controls are rarely in play but different things are tried and observations noted. Two thumbs up to Papa for sharing. More of us should do that. I do when I share my opinions as they are all based on my real field experience, without exaggeration, rather than parroting marketing or other anecdotal rhetoric. Certainly no two experiences are alike and I embrace that diversity. That is also what makes it so difficult to replicate results whether well controlled or not.I keep playing with fluoro. Made a number of rigs to go to MI with earlier this month. Didn't make a difference but I still had 'em. I've been reading recently about using what I would call "stupid" light fluoro (based on my actual experiences). Due to the source of this information I'm strongly considering re-visiting that "experiment". Can it work? Obviously it does for many people. In those attempts, using circle hooks and #25 fluoro, I got cut off three times before I could even get to the flags. Fishing in extremely heavy weeds had fish taking enough line and enough turns in the salad to put enough tension on that line where it was cut very easily. My next attempts will be on open water scenarios where I'll at least stand a fighting chance.Hopefully PapaSly, you have not been offended by my observations here. None were personal nor intended to be belittling, insulting or otherwise disrespectful to you. In fact, most of my comments were directed at others here that, on viewing your experience, seized upon it as "the absolute proof". Even my own personal observations are not absolute proof of anything except that one singular experience. Tomorrow is always another day.@mcarey97 - A 30# steel Q/S with a pair of 4x #6 trebles is not silly when you're swinging a 14" dead bait looking for mid 40" FISH. I'd call it prudent...no offense taken, I think I should have used the word experience vs expirement. You have always been great to me and very helpful and my way is just that my way and there are many orther ways also.
love this thread. these guys using steel leaders with quick strike rigs, two treble hooks (even 1) is just silly IMO. 20# floro single circle hook size 1 is all you need to catch big pike. even worse when I see guys using similar set ups for lakers… such over kill