The Traditional Fisherman's Forum
https://www.traditionalfisherman.com/
71lb? Good grief - not sure I could lift 71lb let alone hold it at arms length!Shaun Harrison wrote:Andy is quite slim and it is 71lb!Plot36 wrote:something not quite right with that carp pic. Above the carp we what appears to be a very slim angler, whereas below the carp . . . . . . and look at the length of those arms . . .
Ah - that makes sense - I was assuming he was standing up to his waist in the water. DohMaggot's Dad wrote:Shaun Harrison wrote:The common that Andy Chambers is holding weighed over 71lb (can't remember the ounces) and is currently the largest known common in the Orient. Interesting how we are now seeing quite a lot of big commons cropping up with several larger than the one Andy is holding in different waters (and countries). I picked out the Orient fish as to me it looks like one hell of a fighter and carries such a massive frame.
I certainly do admit that it is a magnificent fish. At that weight I would say that he must be in the squat position with his elbows supported on his knees. It is one very big lump, but cameras always distort the image unless the fish is held close to the body. I would much prefer to see that sort of image, then it would really make more people look!
I must admit I thought that myself at the time but that really didn't matter to me. To be angling on such an important and historical water in the footsteps of Ingham, Walker, the Taylor brothers and so on, it wouldn't have mattered too much to me if if it had two tails. It was a massive honour to have been invited for the first trip and an even greater one when I had my second trip. The third invite I am very excited about.JAA wrote:It's a nice looking fish, but it looks look like a 'mostly carp', crucian hybrid or even a goldfish to me.Shaun Harrison wrote:Andy is quite slim and it is 71lb!Plot36 wrote:something not quite right with that carp pic. Above the carp we what appears to be a very slim angler, whereas below the carp . . . . . . and look at the length of those arms . . .
Give me a double figure wildie to target or any wildie for that matter in my area. I was lucky enough to land one in 1984 although to be fair it looked like it was carrying spawn so not a true wildie. I also had a couple just under double figures but sadly the water was stocked with mirrors and the wildies fast disapeared. I went back after around 10 years caught a lot of carp but none of those originals.Mark wrote:Give me a ten pound wildie any day.
The oldest carp I caught last year and one that probably had the longest history was I guess this one from Woldale. Not a wildie by any means but a very old looking fish indeed that has no doubt share the area with some very traditional anglers over the years.
Now that is what it's all about for me, you lucky bugger Shaun.Shaun Harrison wrote: I must admit I thought that myself at the time but that really didn't matter to me. To be angling on such an important and historical water in the footsteps of Ingham, Walker, the Taylor brothers and so on, it wouldn't have mattered too much to me if if it had two tails. It was a massive honour to have been invited for the first trip and an even greater one when I had my second trip. The third invite I am very excited about.
The fish to me are unimportant when they live in a pool which plays such a massive part of our carp fishing heritage. The formation of the Carp Catchers Club, the Drop me a Line book might never have happened if it was not for this most beautiful place.
Sorry that the roach thread has progressed into a knocking big carp thread then mellowed down with a lovely tranquil historic pool. 
There is a possibility of some rudd in there although the lips say roach, but chub's head?Bigoll wrote:Not sure about that 'roach' given it has a rudd's eye and a chub's head. Looks very suspicious to me!
