CHICAGO, ILLINOIS (July 5, 2000)—Big money bass fishing tournaments are attracting more and more attention in the press and sponsorships by major companies.  The best-known, test-of-the-best will take place July 20 – 22 when the BASS Masters Classic World Championship of pro fishing weigh-ins at Chicago’s Soldier Field.

Winning purses in the six-figures $100,000 or more—are luring the best fishing talent.  With so much at stake, the rewards of success so high, is there an undercurrent, hidden below, that may surface at any time to rock the big bucks boat.

In a word, how “honest” are bass fishing tournaments?

“Cheating has to be a concern,” says Ray Scott, the founder of the Bass Anglers Sportsman Society (B.A.S.S.), and the man credited with establishing the sport of tournament bass fishing.

“I’d be less than truthful,” says Scott, “if I passed the question off as just bad press or acted as if it’s not a major worry.”

“People intent on breaking the rules—cheating—can be very cunning,” continues Scott.  “The true judgment of a man’s character is: what would a person do if he knew he wouldn’t be caught.”

There are measures to protect the integrity of tournaments:  (1) Strict rules, (2) Draw tournaments, (3) Invitational formats, and (4) Professional polygraph exams.

“They’re very popular, around the country, but so-called buddy tournaments leave me on edge,” opines Scott, who conducted his first All-American Invitational Bass Tournament in 1967 on Beaver Lake, Arkansas.

“At my first tournament,” continues Scott, “I was so paranoid and suspicious, I didn’t dare pair partners from the same state.  Matter of fact, after the first day, I put an observer, a third man, in the boat with the leaders, who were drawn out together.”

The draw tournament format “greatly diminishes the opportunities for cheating,” explains Scott.  “With different partners paired every day of the fishing—and in many cases an unknown stranger—there’s only a remote chance of rule bending.  Each angler is a ‘policeman’ and watches the other, and at the weigh-in must sign a slip testifying to the fish being caught legally.”

Scott points out, “But, with a bring-your-buddy and fish format, you open the door wide for any crooks in the crowd.  I’m saddened to say it, but fishermen are guilty of cheating crimes, and not just for big money prizes.  Some will do it just for ‘the honor’ of winning.  A misguided feat of being claimed the best.”

As a safety net to catch possible cheaters, buddy tournament promoters and organizations put in the rules:

“Any team placing will be subject to a Lie Detector (Polygraph) Test.  Refusal of test is automatic forfeiture of winnings.”

How effective is a “lie detector” probe?  “First, the requirement of a polygraph exam acts as a deterrent and can be used to confirm suspicious behavior,” agrees Scott.

“But, the problem is often the validity of the test and the qualifications of the polygraph examiner.  A professional, formal polygraph exam requires, in most cases, over two hours.  The best qualified examiners typically charge $250 to $350 per test.

“Most lie-detector tests given at tournament weigh-ins are less than 30 minutes in length, and conducted by off-duty police personnel at $100 per test.

“Don’t misunderstand,” continues Scott, “the use of the polygraph to build a firewall against cheating is worthwhile insurance, but not foolproof.  Tournament promoters must stay vigilant.  Keep suspected cheaters on the sidelines.”

The popularity of buddy tournaments are fun events, but “you don’t really learn any new fishing techniques or lure presentations by fishing with the same old, tried-and-true partner every tournament,” points out Scott.  “With a draw format, you’ll end up fishing with a brand new partner, and chances are pickup new ideas to catch more bass.”

Scott suggests, “If buddy events are conducted by marine dealers, dock owners or promoters, alike, use the best polygraph exams you can afford.

“Some small operators may decide otherwise, but,” continues Scott, “to insure the integrity of the tournament, conduct three polygraph test to include:  (1) the winning team (one partner is adequate), (2) big bass winner, and (3) a random selection by the tournament sponsor or promoter.  This keeps everyone on the up-and-up.”

Scott admits to as many as “twenty-five incidents of suspected rule violations and protests by other anglers” in the three decades of being associated with B.A.S.S. events.  In 1998 Scott left the organization he founded to form Ray Scott Outdoors™, a marketing-consulting firm for fishing tackle and marine manufacturers.  He serves as national spokesman for Triton Boats, Mercury Outboards, MotorGuide trolling motors, and Sporting Lives, the Coast Guard approved inflatable lifevest SOSPENDERS.

Scott’s vigilance was put to the test in 1974 at the All-American B.A.S.S. Tournament on Clark’s Hill Reservoir, SC-GA.  The complete episode is detailed in Ray’s biography, “BASS BOSS” in the chapter titled:  “The Cheater.”

As it turned out, the draw pairing format trapped the cheater.  Ray received a call after the tournament from a Georgia B.A.S.S. club president, who related two club members had fished with a Virginia fisherman, who made suspicious statements on two different days.

“What he said,” recalls Scott, “was asking:  ‘Have you got any fish located?’ and then would add:  ‘If you don’t have any fish, I’ve got an ace in the hole.’

Nothing else out-of-the-way happened the first two days, but Scott didn’t dismiss the possibility the “ace-in-the-hole” just might be a basket of bass.

In the book, Scott uses only the name, “Wade S.,” to recount the story “out of deference to his family.”

Wade’s third-day partner was Bob Martin, a 25-year old Springfield, Missouri angler.  Scott telephoned him, and discussed the events of the tournament, congratulating Martin for qualifying for the BASS Masters Classic championship.

After getting Martin’s comments on his first two-day partners, Scott told him to think about the events of day three, with Wade S., and call him back in ten minutes.

Scott said, “It wasn’t five minutes later, Bob Martin called back, crying and blurted out the truth.  Wade’s ace-in-the-hole was a planted basket of fish.”

The older, 55-year-old Wade had bullied Bob Martin into going to the basket and getting the fish.  The bass Martin was offered, he tossed up on the bank.  The fish Wade weighed-in put him in the money.  He had not caught a “legal” bass.  On the other hand, Bob Martin had caught three bass, earlier that day, and the needed weight to make the 1974 Classic finals.

Scott says, “When Wade realized he was caught, he told the whole story of the bloody conspiracy.  Before the tournament catching the fish, put them in the basket, tied a string to the cache and concealed it in a willow.”

“Wade wanted to be a winner, so bad, he turned out bad,” said Scott, who banned him from future B.A.S.S. tournaments for life.  Bob Martin was suspended from the Classic and competition for a year.  He placed 19^th on his return at Bull Shoals Lake.

“It was a bad experience and a black eye for B.A.S.S. tournaments,” said Scott.  “But, we faced up to the problem, sent out a news release, and showed the world we’d not put up with any monkey business.”

Scott says there’s a positive side to giving a “lie detector test.”  A polygraph can reveal (prove) the truth.

Such was the incident and protest filed by a tournament fisherman, who claimed he witnessed a fish being handed from one boat to another boat.

“The complaint was against Bobby and Billy Murray, two of the finest fishermen and sportsmen I knew,” said Scott.  “But, the witness firmly believed he’d seen the pair exchange a bass.”

As within the rules, Scott called all parties into Montgomery, Alabama for a battery of polygraph exams.  And, got to the facts.

“Bobby Murray, a two-time Classic winner, and his twin brother, Billy, were without a character flaw in my mind,” said Scott.  “But, the witness was convinced, in his mind, he’d seen them exchange a bass.

“What the witness had observed—from about 100 yards away—was the passing of a fish measuring board, silver one at that, from boat-to-boat,” said Scott.  “There was no rule violation.  Just an honest mistake.  But, without the polygraph exam, we’d not been able to establish the truth.”

Harold Sharp of Chattanooga, Tennessee, the long-time former B.A.S.S. Tournament director in Scott’s early years, recalls the case of the “Guppy Man,” a minnow, fish-bait dealer that tried to beat the system.

“We were holding a tournament at Buggs Island Lake out of Clarksville, Virginia,” recounts Sharp.  “Before a boat checks out, all the livewells and compartments are searched to guard against any fish being onboard or in the wells.

“The Guppy Man was paired with an angler from South Carolina (Connie Baker) but was late to the check out, and came up to me at the end of the dock.  I called to Connie on the bullhorn to pick him up.  He had his tackleboxes, rods and reels and was wearing a full length raincoat, even though the weather forecast was for clear skies.”

Later, Sharp learned why the long slicker.  “He had two stringers full of bass draped around his neck and under the raincoat.  He’d supposedly caught a couple of fish and put ‘em in the livewell before his partner, Connie Baker, figured something about the fish-catches didn’t seem right and uncovered the truth.”

“That’s the most bizarre case of attempted cheating I remember at a B.A.S.S. tournament,” says Scott, “but recently I viewed a video tape of a modern-day vigilante group rounding up some cheaters in Tennessee.”

Burt Brown of Estill Spring, Tennessee had been suspicious of cheating by a pair winning all the tournaments on Tims Ford Lake.  “I’d been trying to find out if they were cheating for over two and a half years,” said Brown.  “Finally, we located a fish basket hung on a dock and set the trap, during a night tournament.  We had a video camera, staked out the dock and caught them red-handed with a landing net, an open livewell and the basket with bass in it.”

“They tried to lie out of it,” said Brown, who in the tape confronts the suspected cheaters with a 30-30 deer rifle in his hands.  “They claimed they’d found the basket and were going to release the fish.  Yeah, right into their open livewell in the boat.” Brown and his vigilantes offered to let the pair tell their side of the story at the weigh-in.  But, there was no denying the facts as shown on the videotape.

Scott says, “There’s always been stories about fishermen being liars, even if you get them to swear on a stack of Fisherman’s Bibles, they’re telling the truth about what they caught and where.  But, don’t get the idea all bass fishermen are not to be trusted. 

“Before we introduced B.A.S.S. tournament regulations and standards, people referred to them as ‘Dirty Derbies’ and fair play was not always in the spirit of the rules.  Today, the best judge of fair play is the bass angler in the other end of the boat.”

To its credit, the BASS Masters Classic is a shining example. The fairest, toughest test for a bass angler to win.  Not a hint of “misdoings” since the Classic launched in 1971 at Lake Mead, Nevada.  Riding with each pro qualifier at the 2000 Chicago Classic will be an official observer and/or a member of the outdoor press…“in the other end of the boat.”

Weighing the Pros and Cons

About Tourney Winner’s Talk

How to Separate a Hot Tip from Hot Air

Keeping bass tournament weigh-ins honest?  The use of polygraph machines to insure bass weighed-in are caught fair and square under the rules.

A “lie detector” may weed out the bad seeds as far as what’s weighed-in, but the sidebar situation is: how truthful are the “tell us how you caught ‘em” reports?

Without reservations, it’s fair to assume what a fisherman says up on the weigh-in stage and what actually took place on the water is often misleading.

Part by design and partly due to sponsorship conflicts.  For sure, during the opening rounds of a tournament, only the most unwashed would expect the tournament leader to reveal – truthfully – how he caught the big string or most assuredly what lure worked best.

“Ask me again, on Saturday, (the final day), and I’ll tell you everything you want to know,” is the standard reply, most times, by the Day 1 tournament leader.

Okay, there’s big money at stake.  A chance to earn points to qualify for the season-ending super championship, and the realistic concern about competitors getting on the same pattern.

But, with the final day weigh-in in the bag, fishing fans expect the “pros to tell it all.”

And, generally, they do.  But, the question you must ask is how-to separate the purveyors of hot tips from the bassin’ blowers of hot air?

If the winner sponsor’s vest displays a bold patch for “DingBat Lures,” you don’t have to guess what the bass are biting or do you?

For years on the Bassmaster Tournament Trail, Tom Mann of the Eufaula, Alabama-based lure company, proudly told the truth about his lure presentations.  Either the tailspinner Little George or one of Tom’s scented plastic Jelly Worms did the deed.  “Trust me.”  Naturally, you figured Tom would fish his own baits.

But, to his credit, Tom Mann told the truth.  Even, once admitting to using a “Brand-X” lure that his partner was “tearing them up with.”  From that point forward, Tom Mann spoke the gospel when it came to touting his super-successful flavor of the day.

Maybe a lie detector exam for “truth in advertising” is going a bit overboard to qualify a tournament winning lure.  But why not?

High-profile tournament pros and their supporting sponsors share the responsibility to be straight shooters with their admiring fans.

In past cases of “misinformation,” tournament winners have confused the issue and even claimed to having been “misquoted”, when the secret bait credited with the mega-victory was different than the comments gleaned in the press pre-weigh-in interview.

“Okay, we’ll check back later – after you’ve checked with sponsor or potential lure sponsor” is hardly a wise option.

If asking the tournament winner to take a polygraph test to verify his “winning lure” is out-of-the-questions, then how about a simple act of faith.

The weighmaster should ask: “Do you swear on this stack of Fisherman’s Bibles to share the whole truth and nothing but the truth?”

Obviously, we’re trying to break new ground here.  Asking a bass fisherman to tell the truth about a fish story.  But, the full story on the “secret lure” would be appreciated…embellished by sponsors or not. – BOB COBB