Time again for that regular feature, where, on behalf of the FM readers, I take a gimlet -eyed look at the offerings in the angling press. Whether the companies or individuals involved are deliberately trying to slip things ‘under the radar’ is not always clear, but they can be assured that not much gets past me….

First up is a newly launched range of what are described as 3D baits, at last, I hear you cry. Away with those old 2D baits we were struggling with before such as…errrr……perhaps something like hair rigged Communion wafers, side hooked, flat as a pancake, pancake sections. Maybe someone has been using the ultimate fake bait, which would be a photograph, (now, if you are pegged in a match next to a certain G Knowles in the near future and he comes over begging for bait, just give him a Polaroid of your bait to fish with, although, he would probably still catch using that!) or even a drawing of a tempting morsel may seem an irresistible offering. Other than that, unless I feel asleep during that particular physics class, I seem to remember that anything which isn’t flat and therefore 2D is in three dimensions, and is therefore 3D, which is just about every other bait is, isn’t it?

Tackle reviews are usually always good for throwing up little anomalies. Those that have several well respected individuals reviewing different items, personal likes and dislikes will sometimes conflict, but that is to be expected, and usually a fair consensus is agreed at in the end. However, where personal preferences are allowed to cloud the final verdict, you have to wonder if anyone reads the results before they are published.


“Tackle reviews are usually always good for throwing up little anomalies”

To give you an example, here is a rod review that lists the pros and cons over several different feeder rods. My eye is particularly drawn to this one make, which is listed as having one of the best ‘actions’ of the rods tested. However, in the ‘dislikes’ section, it is marked down as having ‘boring’ graphics. Well, that would put me off buying is straight away – NOT! Perhaps it is just me, but when I am looking for a new rod, I automatically steer clear of any rod whose manufacturer chooses to use eighteen inches of the butt section as free advertising space.

If I do have to buy a rods that are so embellished, because all other things considered, they are the best tools for the job, I am certainly not adverse to getting out the wet and dry and removing said graffiti, a couple of quick coats of satin varnish and I’m off to fish with my pristine, unadorned, beauties, and if no one else can tell what they are – I really am not that bothered!

In fact, it surprises me that someone hasn’t started flogging ‘upgrade’ stickers to put on your rods in an effort to impress other anglers into thinking your prized possessions are better that they actually are. Whilst a sticker upgrade from 2.75lb TC to 3.5lb TC may be a little too subtle, re-labelling the rod to look like it comes from a different, and much more expensive, manufacturer entirely can only impress your angling friends and colleagues. What’s that you say, some makers are already doing just that and selling the same blank as different brands, the cunning devils!

Also, another practise which is rapidly on the increase, and one particularly, which I saw with relation specifically to barbel, is that of sleeving the swivels on leads in an effort to disguise them and thereby stop them spooking fish. The description given involved taking a tail rubber and jamming it completely over the swivel, right up to the lead itself, thereby completely hiding from view, and thus making it absolutely invisible to these highly wary underwater adversaries.

As an interesting side effect, such a modification also has the effect of rendering the swivel totally incapable of revolving, thereby making it useless. Might I be so bold as to suggest that a simple pear lead with a wire loop would achieve exactly the same effect? I have seen such things for sale, in all sorts of camou coatings as well, and they must be cheaper than buying leads with swivels and adding some form of rubber sleeving, but that’s not the point – is it?

And finally…..This week’s discussion point involves the monarchy, and just what we anglers have done to upset them. Why is it that we have a Royal Society for the Protection of Animals, a Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, but we don’t apparently don’t warrant a Royal Society for the Protection of Fish? It’s not like they are adverse to our sport. The Queen Mum (God bless her) was known to enjoy a spot of salmon fishing, Prince Charles has been seen to waggle his rod about, and has granted Royal Warrants to certain tackle manufacturers, so why no Royal Society for us…? It makes you wonder

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR