Makes me wonder sometimes: how many ideas presented on c.com are found useful?
Many of us have been posting opinions/ideas for years - some new, some not but still useful. I've had discussions with a few local anglers and for some, found change not in the cards even when 'the eyes don't lie'. Granted, if an angler does as well without those changes, no point in changing.
A local angler I fished with used one color Crappie Magnet on one jig weight for over a year that caught him as many fish as me using different lure shapes and presentations. This year he was willing to try some of my hybrid lures and did well if not better, asking for more after seeing how many fish he caught. He's a basic angler - cast, retrieve and, catch fish with it. Why it catches fish not important to him. Why, is what we discuss and have strong opinions on - most not universally accepted. But again if it works, it works regardless line, rod, reel or lure. The big question: how often in comparison to other ideas presented?
I guess it comes down to a few things:
The ability or curiousity to try new ideas or consider an alternate that may be an improvement - especially after trial & error testing that proved a positive change.
Being forced to accept good advice because the old way of thinking had flaws that made for frequent frustration.
Not willing to change to because what has worked continues to work - even with some flaws.
When it comes to lures, are many universal to most waters? Maybe not, but I've found that most designs do well catch fish regardless the lake - and most fish species to boot! Nothing wrong with using one lure and doing well, but just not the reason I fish: catching fish on more discovered lure designs. That's something rarely sought by others.
