Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If you want access to members only forums on HSO, you will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member. ?

57 x 33


JRedig

Recommended Posts

Crazy and huge! LxGxG/800 formulas go out the window on fish like this, its hard to tell how thick the 18+ inches of tail hanging off to the right are.

Beast: Yes.

Sumo-Beast: Yes.

World Record territory fish: Pending it being an accurate measure (assumedly so), despite the huge belly and lack of overall lengthwise mass, I'd say it's definitely flirting with the 70lb marker.

That said......never in my wildest dreams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know I'm speaking heresy here but I always said I would never keep a musky unless it was a possible world record. Wouldn't even keep a state record. What do others think? And I've always wondered what would the new world record musky be worth monetarily? Like endorsements, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huge. It has a case of beer belly though, as cjac pointed out the weight doesn't seem to go all the way to the tail. Still an impressive fish and props to the guy for releasing it. Only problem with the photo is anyone making a replica can't see the tail...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:
VahnTitrio, who says those are the only 3 pics of the fish? C'mon guys it's a big fish. Leave it at that.

JR,

I don't think anything was said to the contrary or challenging the legitimacy of the fish. There are other sites for that! wink

Vahn was just saying it's a belly-heavy fish, different in comparison to the longer and thicker overall mass than let's say the Dahms/Jonesi Mille Lacs fish of a couple years ago. Again, just a comparison for body-mass make-up sake. This one reminded me of the beer-pig that Hamernick put a client on a few years back.

If anything he was simply saying the perspective and coloration of the 18-20 inches of the tail is lost in the photos we've seen thus far. The angler will be sharing the whole story, he said the fish came out of the water once! I cannot imagine what that would have been like to see......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way that fish is 57", let alone a 33" girth grin. Photoshop all day long blush. Never seen a St Lawrence fish marked like that either crazy, must be a MN secret spot shocked. Someone had to do it!!!!

What a beast, congrats to the angler on a fish of thousands of lifetimes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It definitely is a beautiful MONSTER... majority of us can only dream when it comes to those super-fishes... at least pictures like that keeps us die-hards drooling til the season opens... something to look forward to!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm looking at the planer reels... not sure but those don't look like 8'' reels. anyone know that manufacturer? i just don't think that a guy that size has a 8'' around head. and they are in back which makes them smaller than the forefront. if they are 8'' it would take 4+ of them fitting inside her. if they are 9'' 3 2/3 of them, assuming the outer rims were the measurement not the inside reel spool. i just don't know. but i do know that fish is bigger than anything in freshwater thats ever swam near me. man that's a pig. eek

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.