McFly Can't Fish
Posted by Pete Robbins on Oct 4th 2020
I don’t hear it today as much as I did about 10 years ago, but there was a time when many of the old school bass pros lamented: “If you just gave these young kids a paper map and a flasher, they’d have no idea how to catch a bass.”
It’s true that technology has changed the game.
It’s also true that we’re likely not going backwards. Side-imaging, tungsten weights, GPS and razor-sharp hooks are here to stay.
But what if we could go back in time? I tend to believe that even without all of those modern conveniences, the cream would still rise to the top. Perhaps the offshore game would be compromised a bit, hurting some specialists, but increasingly the young pros are good at about every technique under the sun.
For the sake of argument, however, let’s say we had a “low technology” tournament. What if we could send anglers back to 1985? Give them pistol grips, lead sinkers, blue monofilament. Again, I think that great anglers are great anglers, so let’s make this academic exercise a little more interesting: If YOU were one of the ones being sent back, and you were allowed THREE post-Super-Bowl-Shuffle advances, what would you choose?
[Why three? Because I’m the one making up this hypothetical.]
For the purposes of this question, we’ll define “advances” broadly. It could be something technological like side-imaging or GPS. It could be a type of fishing gear, like Senkos or tungsten or fluorocarbon or braided line. It could even be a technique, like dropshotting.
I’m guessing that most of the pros would start with some electronics feature, perhaps even a couple of them. I’m not sure that would hold true for the weekend angler. Either way, it would make for some comical footage as Joe the Pro located the ultimate mega school, and then had to try to catch them with old school gear and techniques. Conversely we might go back to the days of just about everybody beating the bank.
Which three would YOU choose?
And what about if we made it TWO?
Or ONE?
