It Keeps on Pinging

Another week, another forward-facing sonar win, another round of debates.

Just as importantly, it’s a second Elite Series win for young South Carolina pro Patrick Walters, one with largemouths, one with smallmouths, both also producing Century Belts – although perhaps surprisingly the brown fish of the St. Lawrence weighed more than the green fish of legendary Lake Fork (albeit by just 4 ounces).

The two wins came just over three years apart, and as far as I can recall there was no meaningful anti-FFS chatter FFS when he won at Fork. We may have discussed what it meant for the future, but I don’t remember tar and feathers. At that time, I’d venture a guess that the majority of top pros were not using it, or if they were it wasn’t their default setting. Today, everyone has it on their boat, even if it’s not necessarily the same brand that Walters has. That certainly contributed to him winning by a ridiculous 29 pounds at Fork. He could have stayed home on Day 4 and still won. To my way of thinking, that’s far less interesting than a St. Lawrence tournament that he won by just over a pound, even if everyone at the top was fishing similarly. There was drama and suspense this week, whereas then there was none.

I still remain agnostic about whether FFS should be limited, and if so, how. I’m hesitant to make the jump for several reasons. First of all, I don’t have a lot of faith in the tournament organizations rule writers. Look at all of the gray areas that exist outside of technology – we saw many this year, from jumping into “connected waterways” to “recatching” bedding fish. There are too few people on earth who have a full understanding of technical drafting as well as a full understanding of tournament fishing ethics and practices to get it done. That’s further complicated by the fact that the technology changes yearly – any rule is likely to be either overinclusive in a manner that hurts the sport, or underinclusive in a manner that allows the same impact, just in a different box.

Furthermore, I’m still trying to sort out the wheat from the chaff on the arguments themselves. So far, I’ve yet to hear an anti-FFS argument from anyone who was doing well with it. Most of the opposition comes from anglers who are over 40, used to doing well, and now they’re not doing quite as well. Their arguments may prove persuasive, or they may fail the test of time. The analogy I think of is popular music – every generation is angry that their parents say that their music is an abomination, and then they go on to criticize the next generation’s choices and tastes. Some of that music does indeed turn out to suck, but not all of it. The reflexive hatred for anything new or anything not in your wheelhouse can be blinding. Similarly, some of the arguments against FFS don’t strike me as being based in fact – notably, the idea that it will harm tackle sales, kill viewership or destroy interest in the sport. Again, some or all of those rationales may turn out to be correct, but there’s no evidence to support them yet. If you have access any real numbers supporting those ideas I’d love to see them.

So I’m going to spend the next few months figuring out what I really think. I have a Garmin unit on my boat and while it hasn’t turned me into Patrick Walters yet, and I’m not expecting that it will, it wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world.