Pros and Cons
by Al Pugh

Spring is nearly here, and the magazine and Internet articles telling us how to handle this season are legion. In this article, however, I’ll take up another point. If any group of people is prone to learn from sitting around shooting the breeze, it is hunters and anglers. Before the Internet, this occurred largely in bait and ammo type sporting goods stores. Some of us remember these sessions around a pot-bellied stove. As I have mentioned often, this is how I view message boards on the Internet. On some, I have recently seen references to professional bass anglers in a light that bears some discussion.

I am always interested in how "pro" anglers are perceived. Since we know so little, really, about the sport we love so much, we look to whatever resources we can find to help us at every turn. This is neither good nor bad, it simply is what I have seen nearly all others do and have done myself.

Having had the great fortune to meet some "pros" (not to infer that any are deep friends), I believe that the only real difference between a good non-pro angler and a pro angler is quality time on the water and the desire to be a pro. Most of them who I have put this question to, agree. In this group are Don Iovino, Woo Daves, Larry Nixon, Jimmy Houston, and others not as well known. I have only had discussions with some of these once, others, I have spent more time with.

Many, many anglers have the capability to be pros with respect to fishing, but do not desire to because of a dislike for serious competitive fishing, or because they are not good at marketing, or for other personal reasons. This is why it always bothers me to see a pro's name thrown out in a discussion, as though to say, "This advice is the final word." I have seen this more than once, and the underlying assumptions ought to be examined.

Understand that the role of a pro is NOT primarily to catch fish, it is primarily to promote bait, equipment, an organization, or some combination of these. If the angler is really lucky, he or she is responsible solely to promote fishing itself. That is my great blessing in my role with Yamamoto. I do not by any stretch of any imagination consider myself a "pro". That handle goes with writing for Inside Line, but I am not equating myself with the well-known pros.

---

"I'm merely pointing out that the Professional Angler of today should not be understood to be the top x% of all the anglers in the world. Rather, they are the best marketers of all the good anglers who wished to try to be a marketer."

---

Let’s compare that to a fictitious pro angler that I’ll call Chuck Fishbait. Chuck is sponsored by, let’s say Equipment X and Bait Y. Chuck earns his sponsorship (free or discounted products and clothing, usually) by promoting the products marketed by his sponsors. He is under an obligation to promote them to retain the sponsorship. Merely from a decent understanding of human nature, one should expect some "pros" to promote anything they can, regardless of whether or not they have to tell the truth. It would not be right to infer that they are all this way, they are not. They are people, and the ratio of honest ones to dishonest ones will reflect what you encounter in your everyday life.

Our fictitious Chuck is one of the good ones. He doesn’t like any of the rods Y Co. wants him to promote, so he gets them to make one he likes. Yes, they do that when it makes business sense to them. Now, Chuck can tell the truth about "his" rod. He loves it, it‘s wonderful, wouldn’t fish with anything else. Maybe it’s a good rod for you, and maybe not. If you fish a lot like our Chuck, it probably is. If you don’t, well, the answer is obvious.

Now, folks, this is just business, and business is NOT anathema to fishing. It is not bad, or dishonest in nature, or evil, it is simply business. It can be done dishonestly, like anything else, but it is not dishonest by its nature. Our Mr. Chuck Fishbait promotes his sponsors, Woo promotes Zooms, Don promotes Garcia, and I promote having fun fishing. We all do it because of our ties with a company in the business. I'm not in their class, but I think I have as good a deal or better than theirs.

I’m not "downing" anyone. I’m merely pointing out that the Professional Angler of today should not be understood to be the top x% of all the anglers in the world. Rather, they are the best marketers of all the good anglers who wished to try to be a marketer. Understanding what pool of individuals that they are selected from makes all the difference in the world. That’s not to say that they are not good anglers. In their role, they must continuously maintain and improve their standing in the "community" of general public anglers, so that they can market effectively. When nobody listens anymore, the contract comes to a rapid end, believe me. The point is that being a pro doesn’t make them the only good anglers, and it doesn’t mean that there aren’t plenty of better anglers that are not "professionals".

Now that it may seem that I have torn them down, even though I haven’t, do we believe Chuck Fishbait or not when he gives advice? As in all other realms of life, one must keep a weather eye and an ear to the ground. Would you trust what some person you never saw before said about some bait? Probably not. Why then place any more stock in a Pro, who you know nothing about? Certainly, his demonstrated proficiency at the types of fishing you want to do is important. His reputation is even more important. Is he accessible, does he seem to like to talk to people? How is his credibility? Most importantly, what, aside from the embroidered shirt and the stickers on his truck, makes you think he knows more than the guy who has been fishing the river for the last 50 years? I’m not saying he does or doesn’t. I’m saying that’s the right basis for evaluating his advice.

To investigate the reality of this perception, look at the standings for any random 10 B.A.S.S. tournaments, over the last several years. You will be surprised at the names with only a few fish for the tournament. Compare them to the amateurs fishing with them, if it's a Pro-Am format. Many "amateurs" will have caught more fish than those "pros". Where then, is the guaranteed knowledge, the basis for the "voice from on high" mentality that I see so often? Trust me, these guys and gals are as normal as the rest of us, they just have a job that puts them in front of us and on the water more often than only some of us.

Without preaching, we would be well advised to employ the principle attributed to the Bereans by St. Paul, in that, having heard what Paul said, they went out to discover if it was true. Good advice is good advice only when you’ve proven it to be good advice, regardless of its source.