57"er from leech

[Scoot]

Holy dump widetrack!!! Judging by the picture, I'd guess that fish is about 83"x39"!!!!!

Seriously, I have no guess. However, it's one huge ars fish! I want one like that!

[Doonbuggy]

I have no doubt it's a 57". First, I don't think someone would want their picture posted if they knew the length was fudged. (Plus, look at the length of that fish's head compared to the guy's head! Wow!)

Secondly, as noted, pictures can be very deceiving. A guy caught a nice 'ski out of Calhoun last year about this time. Looked like a 50" monster in the pic yet it was only 42.5". My buddy's legit 50" 'ski out of LOW this year? Based on the photo you'd be hard pressed to believe it was over 40".

Enough typing though, I'm hitting Harriet for a 'ski myself this afternoon!

[TMan]

Widetrack, my guess is 55 X 28.

As for the pic we are discussing, I look at the distance between the lower pectoral fins and anal fin in relation to the fish, not the person, to estimate. Still doesn't look 57, big dude or not. But who cares what I think, nice fish.

Pictures are decieving, I agree, but this was posted for us to review and so be it if some agree and disagree. Not sure if that's a reason to keep from posting your pics of nice fish. You shouldn't care if someone you don't know from Adam said your fish doesn't look what it measured out to be. Let it roll off your back and share your accomplishment, after all this isn't a contest. Ok, how big is this one? I found this pic deceiveing after I saw it.

[widetrack]

Tman:

Not the dreaded fish stretching pose... No hands showing, tail pushed out etc... Almost impossible to tell from a picture. I would guess you could make a 45 incher look pretty big in that pose.

FYI, my buddies fish was 52x27. A true 26,27,28 inch girth is hard to hide in a picture. Length can get difficult to judge based on lots of variables.

[widetrack]

Hey Whitetips... Nice fish man!

Throw that picture up here will ya, so we can have a wack at it???

[andy j]

52"s, I guessed it! I am good

[MNBIGBEAR]

I know the guy who caught the 57" personally and it was definitely the size he says it was. He is about 6'5" and not a small guy by any means and if you compare the mass of the head to his you get the idea. I saw many other pictures of this fish from different angles and some of the other pictures do the fish more justice. I will see if I can get my hands on them and post them for you guys. He is in Law enforcement and some "forensic" guys even took a look at the pictures and did their measurements and it came up true. I will get those pictures on here for you guys.

[92python]

I'll guess 39" with a weight problem.

[widetrack]

Now there is a true Cynic.

[cjac]

The very fact we are debating the size of such MONSTER fish is a credit to the mangement of the Minn DNR, Muskies Inc, local fishing clubs, etc. Hats off to all.

Think we'd be having a discussion and comparison of catches like this 10 or 15 years ago? Yeah, there's more of us out there throwing, including myself, but it's a credit to everyone out there for making Minn one of the premiere muskie locations in North America. Be it Hennepin or Cass or St Louis county, it's amazing!

That is something to give "thanks" for today! I thank you all!