Matt Herren DQ’ed

I mean the tournament got won in Deep Creek so that’s pretty damn good info.

A lie detector test is just a test of how good you are at lying. If you are a really bad liar you can fail it even if you are telling the truth. Also if you are a really good liar you can pass and be lying your butt off. You have to have the rule and try to enforce it but it's impossible to get it 100 percent correct.


https://media.tenor.com/XrVnjmynB84A...believe-it.gif

Funny how people forget how pissed all the anglers were when the schedule was announced and the no info rule was not in place? All the drama until they reinstated the no info rule......

The anglers want the no info rule.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Josh Herren

He got dq’d because we were talking on Tuesday about how he was spending all his time practicing down south. That’s where he spent his practice and all the tournament. I wasn’t thinking and made a comment hopefully this one doesn’t get one north in deep creek like a tournament that my buddy had fished the previous weekend just as a general comment talking fish. He never went there to look and went right back and put in at Astor the next day. I have fished opens and understand off limits periods but we talk fishing daily and I just wasn’t thinking when I said it. Polygraph examiner asked if he had received any information and told them I had said it on accident but never went in that direction(70 miles the exact opposite is where he went in practice and the tournament). That flagged it as soliciting for information and dq’d him. The rule states soliciting while trying to gain a competitive advantage so I don’t understand how mistakenly being told something and not pursuing the information or using it for any gains can fall into a disqualification.

---

WOW - That is harsh.......

If true, and I have no reason to think it is not true, that comment should not have been enough to DQ. However, if he would have reported the comment to Lisa, stay away he would have been fine.

Sorry this happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Booster

This why BASS needs to get rid of this so called "NO Info Rule". It is a stupid out of date rule. This was set in the days of guys hiring guides to learn the lakes they were to fish. It no longer belongs with the modern technology of satelitte imagery and on-line mapping/navigation maps.

---

:thumb up2:

I agree in spirit, but then guy with the best network would have the best chances of "finding" the fish. #TelephoneFishing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeff Hahn

I disagree. Without the No Info rule, the tournament boils down to who has the best information network, rather than being a fishing contest. Without it, hiring guides, paying for waypoints, and having buddies pre-fish during off limits would be the norm. The No Info rule isn't perfect and it's enforcement may not be as uniform as we'd like, but the situation is far better with it than without it.

---

But that is fishing.

Nobody that’s halfway serious about fishing, and mean nobody, doesn’t collect every bit of information they can about a body of water that they’re going to fish.

To say to the supposedly “best in the world” that they can’t, is ridiculous.

I think in an effort to appease the masses and anglers, we will find out that it will be tough to enforce the no info rule. Things like this will happen, and its how do you apply the rules, 0 tolerance, or show some tolerance. But if its not 0 tolerance we run into other drama, why did you let this guy off and not this one. We already see this issue with the Opens angler. It just gonna be tough road.

I know BBC posts complain about anglers getting info. Sounds like anglers complain about info. I think we got what we want, but when its enforced we don't like how its enforced. In my view the only way to fix this issue is everyone. at each event, has to have a polygraph. I bet you'll DQ many.

I dunno the right answer, we can call people at BASS names but how would you enforce a No info rule? If i was making a decision i think the drama of getting info is less than the drama of trying to enforce no info.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill2e

:thumb up2:

I agree in spirit, but then guy with the best network would have the best chances of "finding" the fish. #TelephoneFishing

---

Then, better networking is a skill that is going to have to be developed, just like any other fishing skill. .

On top of that, “networks” get it wrong just as often as they get it right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill2e

WOW - That is harsh.......

If true, and I have no reason to think it is not true, that comment should not have been enough to DQ. However, if he would have reported the comment to Lisa, stay away he would have been fine.

Sorry this happened.

---

Why? He should have self reported before the tournament. Even if he didn’t go to said location.

what did IKE do to get Dq-ed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 188Musky

But that is fishing.

Nobody that’s halfway serious about fishing, and mean nobody, doesn’t collect every bit of information they can about a body of water that they’re going to fish.

To say to the supposedly “best in the world” that they can’t, is ridiculous.

---

The No Info rule does not prohibit gathering information. Getting info from a public source is perfectly acceptable. And, an angler would be remiss not to get any info that is permissible. The No Info rule only prohibits gathering non-public info. Without this rule, competitors are going to establish huge networks, some paid for by sponsors, to gather all the info they can, including having local promotional staff fishing during off limits and feeding that info to the pros they’re working with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Josh Herren

He got dq’d because we were talking on Tuesday about how he was spending all his time practicing down south. That’s where he spent his practice and all the tournament. I wasn’t thinking and made a comment hopefully this one doesn’t get one north in deep creek like a tournament that my buddy had fished the previous weekend just as a general comment talking fish. He never went there to look and went right back and put in at Astor the next day. I have fished opens and understand off limits periods but we talk fishing daily and I just wasn’t thinking when I said it. Polygraph examiner asked if he had received any information and told them I had said it on accident but never went in that direction(70 miles the exact opposite is where he went in practice and the tournament). That flagged it as soliciting for information and dq’d him. The rule states soliciting while trying to gain a competitive advantage so I don’t understand how mistakenly being told something and not pursuing the information or using it for any gains can fall into a disqualification.

---

This sucks for Matt and you are probably kicking yourself for making the comment to him.

Everyone fishing the tournament would have to live like a cloistered nun two weeks prior to the event. :praying: Please Lord let them be on the Senko. :praying: Lipless crankbait in Beeswax Creek. I'll be eating my wife's lucky cookie, Amen.

It would kind of make the pro's want to stay away from fans and not interact. With the possibility of someone giving out unsolicited info.
Also, I don't know anything about polygraphs but, to ask if you got any info would seem to be vague question? All pro's get some kind of info. I can see the brain squirming around and trying to filter what info was obtained and was it illegal...lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Josh Herren

He got dq’d because we were talking on Tuesday about how he was spending all his time practicing down south. That’s where he spent his practice and all the tournament. I wasn’t thinking and made a comment hopefully this one doesn’t get one north in deep creek like a tournament that my buddy had fished the previous weekend just as a general comment talking fish. He never went there to look and went right back and put in at Astor the next day. I have fished opens and understand off limits periods but we talk fishing daily and I just wasn’t thinking when I said it. Polygraph examiner asked if he had received any information and told them I had said it on accident but never went in that direction(70 miles the exact opposite is where he went in practice and the tournament). That flagged it as soliciting for information and dq’d him. The rule states soliciting while trying to gain a competitive advantage so I don’t understand how mistakenly being told something and not pursuing the information or using it for any gains can fall into a disqualification.

---

Y'all related?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeff Hahn

The No Info rule does not prohibit gathering information. Getting info from a public source is perfectly acceptable. And, an angler would be remiss not to get any info that is permissible. The No Info rule only prohibits gathering non-public info. Without this rule, competitors are going to establish huge networks, some paid for by sponsors, to gather all the info they can, including having local promotional staff fishing during off limits and feeding that info to the pros they’re working with.

---

While you’re probably right about about some having large entourages and lackeys doing their bidding, it seems like the no-info rules are being used to try to create some kind of tournament utopia where all the contestants are starting as equals.

This, among other things, seems to be maneuvering top level tournament fishing into some untenable positions.

That truly sucks for Mr. Herron. I understand they need some kind of rule and try to inforce it the best they can, but in this case, a DQ is eccessive. I don't have a better answer, but that really seems unfair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 188Musky

While you’re probably right about about some having large entourages and lackeys doing their bidding, it seems like the no-info rules are being used to try to create some kind of tournament utopia where all the contestants are starting as equals.

This, among other things, seems to be maneuvering top level tournament fishing into some untenable positions.

---

That’s the entire purpose of the rule…to make the tournament a contest of fishing skill and knowledge of each competitor against each of the other competitors. The rule, and particularly its enforcement, is not perfect. But, that's no reason to abandon the over-all goal of creating as level,of a playing field as possible.

I wonder if the DQ is because that was where it was won? That would have been very good information had he acted upon it.

I guess they have to walk around with ear plugs no TV or internet no associating with any one till after said tournament. To be a pro in this day and age you have to live like a hermit just come out of your cave when it's time to fish.