BLOG: Short on bragging rights

I LOVE 99cm fish – there's something special about falling just short, a bittersweet moment of sorts that many people moan and groan about which in reality they should be savouring.

A lot of people seem to catch kilo bream. I tend to catch many around the 900 gram mark and can't say that the kilo plus models find their way into my net as often as I'd like.

Don't get me wrong, those 900 gram fish do a great impersonation of kilo-plus models, often looking and acting the part ... even when I hold them in one hand and try to estimate the weight, they certainly feel over the kilo threshold, however, experience has taught me that they're probably a 900 odd gram "poor cousin".

Many NSW fishos moan about pesky 64cm kingfish, a fish that is often chastised or treated with disdain – so close to legal size yet so far. When the size limit on kings was 60cm we were all catching 59cm fish. Now that the limit has increased to 65cm, feedback would suggest most of the rats are on growth suppressants which stop them that frustrating centimetre short of the limit. Do the fish actually read up on size limits and send out their undersized buddies' kamikaze style or have our complaint goalposts shifted?

Is an angler whose catches constantly fall short of the magic "metrey" mark a second rate citizen compared to a one hit wonder who flukes one on their first go? Maybe we need to keep a ledger of all captures and average out success rather than allowing the painful gloating that accompanies lifelong bragging rights as our one hit wonder mate hits a benchmark!

Anglers often stretch the truth – the classic catch phrase, "it was this big", is usually accompanied with generously outstretched arms. The fruits of being proud and celebrating success is deserved and honestly earned, whereas blatant self promotion and the constant pursuit of bragging rights appears a little artificial and strange, in my humble opinion.

100kg striped marlin are often tagged then released by the punters – they get many plus points for releasing a stunning apex predator, and a few minus points for overstating what is often a 70-80kg fish and no less spectacular than their 100kg plus brethren.

Some people don't know better and attempt to make honest estimations of size in the absence of experience; others just want to stretch things to get the milestone monkey off their back.

Why is it that we try and extract every last kilo/centimetre to make our catches seem bigger and better than they really are? Is a 99cm barra really that painful to deal with? Is falling just short of a benchmark any less of an achievement?

I appreciate that we all set goals and targets – I'm the same and would love to catch the big fish milestone of any species I chase ... but I still love all of those fish that fall just short.

What do you guys think; is someone who reaches a big fish milestone then brags about it a lesser angler than those who consistently produce the goods without fuss or fanfare? Do you care?

It might pay to remember that Don Bradman's batting average of 99.94 fell ever so short of the magic tonne – that doesn't make him any less of an Australian icon and one of the greatest sportsmen the world will ever know!