I love technology. That 4+ pound drop in cut weight on the non-FFS day speaks volumes.
I love the MLF format—one day without and one day with. You have to be able to use it all. I expect pros to continually adapt and learn. Put in the time and usually you find success.
Rick Clunn's perspective is spot-on. He reminds us how "Minnesota was trying to outlaw his little green boxes" back when the first fish finders appeared. Now those are standard equipment. He talks about FFS "adding to our knowledge" and helping us understand what's happening underwater instead of guessing. As he noted, with traditional approaches, "we were right only 20-30 percent of the time."
We've seen this controversy with every technological advance—GPS, depth finders, even modern rods and reels, lures faced resistance. Each time, the sport adapted and grew.
Replied on Is there even a debate anymore about ...
13 May 08:43
Getting good at something and resting on your laurels is a recipe for antiquity. How many businesses figured something out, never evolved, and are now relics?
If you can only fish one way, are you really the best? I want to see anglers who are continually reinventing and learning. I respect the time, energy and work that is put into something.Â
I'll be honest: we all have access to this technology. If we're complaining, we could be using that time to get better. That's what SUF is about—understanding our environment and constantly improving, with or without new tech. MLF has the formula, one day with and one day without. You could also have two different divisions. NASCAR (No Tech) and Formula 1 (All Tech) divisions of Professional Fishing. What do you think?