Lure placement photos by sponsored anglers

If you use artificial lures to catch any predator this is the forum for you
CraigG
Perch
Perch
Posts: 584
Joined: Mon Aug 29 2011 05:00
Location: Central Scotland

Re: Lure placement photos by sponsored anglers

Post by CraigG »

Steve Dennington wrote: Fri Apr 16 2021 23:14 -
Mark Phillips wrote: Fri Apr 16 2021 15:07 -
As far as the Buster Jerk goes - it doesn't need any promoting IMO, it's one of those lures that just works and I suspect most people will have several in their collection - even last week, whilst working my way round a big, clear pit - half the pike I caught came to a fire tiger sinking Buster, despite chucking quite a range of baits, that was definitely the lure getting the most interest - mainly as it can be cast a good distance, holds its depth, responds well to different retrieves and has a very decent rattle. Hook-up rate and build quality is excellent too. Firmly one of my go to jerk baits.
Agreed. They're one of the few plastic glidebaits that have remained a must-have lure for me over the years. The shallow version is brilliant at this time of year too, working down to about a foot or so, with a very slow rise on the pause with the right combination of hooks and split rings :thumbs:
Steve, what hooks and size of split rings are using to achieve that with busters?
User avatar
Steve Dennington
Zander
Zander
Posts: 5982
Joined: Mon Aug 29 2011 05:00
Location: Suffolk

Re: Lure placement photos by sponsored anglers

Post by Steve Dennington »

CraigG wrote: Mon Apr 19 2021 19:50 -
Steve Dennington wrote: Fri Apr 16 2021 23:14 -
Mark Phillips wrote: Fri Apr 16 2021 15:07 -
As far as the Buster Jerk goes - it doesn't need any promoting IMO, it's one of those lures that just works and I suspect most people will have several in their collection - even last week, whilst working my way round a big, clear pit - half the pike I caught came to a fire tiger sinking Buster, despite chucking quite a range of baits, that was definitely the lure getting the most interest - mainly as it can be cast a good distance, holds its depth, responds well to different retrieves and has a very decent rattle. Hook-up rate and build quality is excellent too. Firmly one of my go to jerk baits.
Agreed. They're one of the few plastic glidebaits that have remained a must-have lure for me over the years. The shallow version is brilliant at this time of year too, working down to about a foot or so, with a very slow rise on the pause with the right combination of hooks and split rings :thumbs:
Steve, what hooks and size of split rings are using to achieve that with busters?
It needs a bit of trial and error, Chris. The buoyancy will vary slightly from lure to lure, and quite a bit with water temperature, so there is no magic formula. Just go smaller on split rings and/or hooks until you get the balance right. The Shallow version is pretty consistent, so it doesn't take much adjustment to get that diving glide and very slow rise and it is definitely worth the effort :thumbs:
JoeNickel
Chub
Chub
Posts: 1392
Joined: Sat May 21 2016 15:41
Location: Beffnal Green innit

Re: Lure placement photos by sponsored anglers

Post by JoeNickel »

Mark Phillips wrote: Fri Apr 16 2021 15:07 -
To be fair to some people, it's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things if they genuinely caught the pike on the lure. When I was field testing lures and writing reviews, I'd occasionally unhook the pike - then hang the lure I caught it with from the chops - very obvious to anyone I would have thought that it wasn't hooked like that. Debatable practice in some people's opinion, but in some ways, I'd rather see a fish photographed like that, i.e. after it has been unhooked :shrug: It's the people photographing pike with lures they didn't catch them on that's the real issue in question - clearly that goes on a fair bit and isn't cricket, as it is misleading potential buyers. I think if you want to see how effective certain lures are, watch a video or ask someone who isn't sponsored.

As far as the Buster Jerk goes - it doesn't need any promoting IMO, it's one of those lures that just works and I suspect most people will have several in their collection - even last week, whilst working my way round a big, clear pit - half the pike I caught came to a fire tiger sinking Buster, despite chucking quite a range of baits, that was definitely the lure getting the most interest - mainly as it can be cast a good distance, holds its depth, responds well to different retrieves and has a very decent rattle. Hook-up rate and build quality is excellent too. Firmly one of my go to jerk baits.
Busters are tremendous, agree completely. The hard lure I have most of, with different sink rates and colours. And I like the look of that new version in the photo at the start of this thread :laughs:
The dildo of consequences rarely arrives lubed
r0bert
Jack Pike
Jack Pike
Posts: 396
Joined: Tue Oct 25 2011 05:00
Location: northern ireland

Re: Lure placement photos by sponsored anglers

Post by r0bert »

We have idiots over here in Northern Ireland who are using the fluorocarbon for leaders catching pike in their U tube videos - these same guys are all over Facebook selling gear.
Plonkers
User avatar
Sebas
Jack Pike
Jack Pike
Posts: 394
Joined: Fri Aug 28 2020 23:07

Re: Lure placement photos by sponsored anglers

Post by Sebas »

Ah yes, the Fabby Lucy special :)
Mmmmmmmm yes
Nige Johns
Barbel
Barbel
Posts: 3846
Joined: Thu Jul 16 2015 21:20
Location: Bury

Re: Lure placement photos by sponsored anglers

Post by Nige Johns »

Sebas wrote: Wed May 19 2021 19:33 -
Ah yes, the Fabby Lucy special :)
I did happen across him one day,there’s no arguing with stupid
User avatar
philbrennan
Stickleback
Stickleback
Posts: 21
Joined: Wed Apr 01 2015 10:56
Location: Manchester

Re: Lure placement photos by sponsored anglers

Post by philbrennan »

The fact is, if you are going to lie or exaggerate or cheat, you are only cheating yourself. It's like the lure fishing Noddy's you get on the canal, 12ft carp rod and tackle shop recommended lures. They've all had 30s out the canal (no pics), I must be doing it wrong!
"Ave you had owt?" Even if i had mate, i wouldnt tell you!
Post Reply