|
|
Member
Posts: 2445
Location: Fremont, Wisconsin | Anybody got a link to the weight/length conversion chart that the anglers play by? I had one, lost it, cannot find where it is listed.
Thanks |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 87
Location: Neenah, WI | I thought they used the WI DNR conversion:
walleye weight = (length x length x length) / 2,700
A 16" walleye - 16x16x16/2700 = 1.5 lbs.
http://dnr.wi.gov/fish/faq/trophy.htm |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 87
Location: Neenah, WI | Here's a link to the chart - http://dnr.wi.gov/fish/faq/trophy.pdf
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 344
Location: Manitowoc WI | If only all my 30's weighted 10.5lbs! |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2445
Location: Fremont, Wisconsin | I dont think they use the wisconsin chart. They do have weights like 1.67#s on aims chart. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 87
Location: Neenah, WI | They likely developed their own detailed chart using 1/4 or 1/8 measurements, which would result in weights like 1.67 lbs. The WI chart is rounded only to .1 lbs.
Here's the WF article I found saying AIM uses the WI DNR formula - http://walleye.outdoorsfirst.com/article.asp?aid=2371
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 87
Location: Neenah, WI | I just put this together using the WI DNR formula.
Attachments
----------------
 Walleye length to weight conversion.xlsx (10KB - 225 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2445
Location: Fremont, Wisconsin | I am guessing since buds bud did not post a link to the actuall aim conversion chart, that it is not on the net.
Thanks schmidtty but was not looking for maybe's, wanted actuals. You know.
Thanks
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 625
Location: LaCrosse, WI | We use that formula for our photo weigh ins and it's pretty slick. Not sure if it's exactly what AIM uses though. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 87
Location: Neenah, WI | Sorry Stacker, I tried. You're right, they don't use the WI DNR formula. It's MN & SD. But in my estimation, the WI formula is closer to reality. The MN & SD formula is closer to prespawn weight....  |
|
| |
|
| Sorry guys but that 32 inch fish that Perry Good caught did not weight 13.9 #'s I personally feel it sends a false image of what Green Bay has to offer. I like the concept but just not how the weights are calculated! At least everyone competes under the same guidlines so I guess it doesn't matter. |
|
| |
|
| No formula will be perfect for every fish. You're correct though, the conversion is the same for everyone and you are basically fishing for inches, so the playing field is even. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2445
Location: Fremont, Wisconsin | Doubtful - 7/2/2010 10:27 AM
Sorry guys but that 32 inch fish that Perry Good caught did not weight 13.9 #'s I personally feel it sends a false image of what Green Bay has to offer. I like the concept but just not how the weights are calculated! At least everyone competes under the same guidlines so I guess it doesn't matter.
Dear Doubtful,
How much do you think Mr. Goods fish would have actually weighed? |
|
| |
|
| My guest on Goods fish would be about 12.4 lbs |
|
| |
|
Location: Rhinelander | That's why a formula is used, so the fish can be immediately released and no one 'guesses'. Some waters the fish would be heavy, some right on, some maybe a bit light depending on the time of year. |
|
| |
|
| Stacker......considering I have caught a few hundred fish between 28 and 32inches on Green Bay I'm going to say probably between 11 and 12.25#'s Some of them are skinny and some bulkier. Looks from the photo I would give it 11.5 definately a good fish. I think to say that fish is just shy of 14lbs is without a doubt inflating things. I think the measuring system is more accurate on the bottom of the scale but as the lengths increases things start getting inflated. But as far as the tournament goes Hey everyone is on the same playing field so it really doesn't matter its just that it creates a image of these guys pulling these MONSTER fish from Green bay and creating rumors. I'm not ripping Aim and i realize there is no perfect solution just bringing some discussion to the table...... |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 344
Location: Manitowoc WI | goods fish prob didn't push much over 11lbs it was pretty skinny.
yes, 26 inch fish on green bay can weight 10lbs.. and 32 inch fish can weigh 10lbs.. i think the formula is a great idea..
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 625
Location: LaCrosse, WI | Who cares how much it actually weighed? Yes it would nice to be 100% accurate 100% of the time, but you will have to be willing to loose a lot of fish for it. I'd rather the tournament world deal with weights that are slightly off then see it get yet another black eye from a big fish kill.
Like said before, everybody's on a level playing field. Now you want to catch the longest fish you can instead of the heaviest fish. 95% of the time, it works out that way anyway so things didn't really change much. If they used a more conservative formula everyone would complain because their fat 27" only showed up as 6lbs when it actually weighed 9.
The system is good, you know where you stand when you're measuring that fish. AIM is moving us in the right direction. Anybody else remember the FLW event on Green Bay a few years ago? I'd much rather see this new system any day.
Edited by GNWC Rookie 7/2/2010 1:49 PM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 344
Location: Manitowoc WI | I agree. I love watching all the feeds to. its a great way to compensate for bringing in the fish. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 397
Location: Badgerland | If I remember correctly..., lots of sun on this brain so no garauntees but, I think they use MI DNR conversion. |
|
| |
|
| I'll start this off by stating that I am not trying to bash the system, but just point out some facts. I am not bashing, because I really don't have a better idea. However, the larger the fish gets the larger the discrepancy due to the fact that you are cubing the weight of the fish. They are dividing by around 2450 instead of 2700. |
|
| |
|
| Sorry, I mean to say cubing the length, not the weight. |
|
| |
|
| what difference does it make what weight they put to what inch? some of you guys just love to bitch about something. I have caught 29.5" fish on green bay that weighed 11.76# and 33" fish that weighed 9.12#. FISH vary. The guy asked for a chart they use, not whether you think it is right or not.
For the guy who has caught over 200 fish on the bay from 28-32" good start guy, protect the resource, dont tell meat hunters where you fish. I have caught thousands. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 265
Location: Lincolnshire, IL | Hundreds! Thousands! Do I hear Tens of Thousands?
If I have told you once I have told you a MILLION times not to exaggerate! |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 3899
| I shake off under 40" fish. And I've caught thousands of them.
Hi IL Wade! |
|
| |
|
| Shep - 7/3/2010 1:34 PM
I shake off under 40" fish. And I've caught thousands of them.
Hi IL Wade! HOW CAN YOU CATCH FISH WHEN YOUR YAPPING ON THE ENTERNET?  |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 104
Location: Laona, Wisconsin | Took a couple hours compiling this from all of the AIM tournaments held since they started. | LENGTH | WEIGHT |
| LENGTH | WEIGHT | | 11.00 | 0.466 | | 22.00 | 4.224 | | 11.75 | 0.575 | | 22.25 | 4.378 | | 12.00 | 0.615 | | 22.50 | 4.537 | | 12.25 | 0.656 | | 22.75 | 4.699 | | 12.50 | 0.700 | | 23.00 | 4.865 | | 12.75 | 0.745 | | 23.25 | 5.035 | | 13.00 | 0.793 | | 23.50 | 5.209 | | 13.25 | 0.842 | | 23.75 | 5.388 | | 13.50 | 0.894 | | 24.00 | 5.570 | | 13.75 | 0.948 | | 24.25 | 5.757 | | 14.00 | 1.003 | | 24.50 | 5.948 | | 14.25 | 1.062 | | 24.75 | 6.143 | | 14.50 | 1.122 | | 25.00 | 6.342 | | 14.75 | 1.185 | | 25.25 | 6.546 | | 15.00 | 1.250 | | 25.50 | 6.754 | | 15.25 | 1.317 | | 25.75 | 6.967 | | 15.50 | 1.387 | | 26.00 | 7.185 | | 15.75 | 1.459 | | 26.25 | 7.407 | | 16.00 | 1.534 | | 26.50 | 7.633 | | 16.25 | 1.612 | | 26.75 | 7.865 | | 16.50 | 1.692 | | 27.00 | 8.101 | | 16.75 | 1.775 | | 27.25 | 8.342 | | 17.00 | 1.860 | | 27.50 | 8.588 | | 17.25 | 1.949 | | 27.75 | 8.838 | | 17.50 | 2.040 | | 28.00 | 9.094 | | 17.75 | 2.134 | | 28.25 | 9.355 | | 18.00 | 2.231 | | 28.50 | 9.621 | | 18.25 | 2.331 | | 28.75 | 9.892 | | 18.50 | 2.434 | | 29.00 | 10.168 | | 18.75 | 2.541 | | 29.25 | 10.449 | | 19.00 | 2.650 | | 29.50 | 10.736 | | 19.25 | 2.762 | | 29.75 | 11.208 | | 19.50 | 2.878 | | 30.00 | 11.325 | | 19.75 | 2.997 | | 30.25 | 11.628 | | 20.00 | 3.119 | | 30.75 | 12.250 | | 20.25 | 3.245 | | 31.00 | 12.570 | | 20.50 | 3.374 | | 32.00 | 13.905 | | 20.75 | 3.507 | | 34.00 | 16.862 | | 21.00 | 3.643 | | 35.00 | 18.490 | | 21.25 | 3.783 | | | | | 21.50 | 3.926 | | | | | 21.75 | 4.073 | | | | |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 181
Location: Manawa Wiscowsin | Sorry about mentioning this on Walleye First, but Walleye Central has a calculator that uses length and girth to calculate weight. You can find the link on the left side of the WC home page. It calculates that my 32" X 19" eye from 1976 weighed 13.22 lbs, a half a pound off.
I estimated the girth for the original post. The actual weight was 13.75 lbs. Going back and experimenting I found that, according to the calculator, the actual girth would have been 19.75".
Edited by BD 7/8/2010 12:52 PM
|
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 2300
Location: Berlin | Those are definitely a little high compared to average fish on the Bago system but everyone is one a fair playing field so who cares. I am sure their are plenty of bodies of water where that would be a touch on the light side as well. |
|
| |
|
Location: Rhinelander | BD,
The fish are not girthed for AIM measurement. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 181
Location: Manawa Wiscowsin | I understand. I just wanted to let others know that there was another system of guestimation and where they could easily access the calculator.
By the way my 13 3/4 lb. eye was caught during the full moon at 11:00pm, by Stevens Reef on Bago. I trolled the reef and picked up several nice eyes and then anchored when I had the bigger ones located. I caught the really big one on a Five of Diamonds. |
|
| |
|
Member
Posts: 591
Location: in the boat off the east shore somewhere | <p>shep estimating length when the fish is 6 feet below the boat works for me too! yup another 40-45 incher! darn just cant get a 50! shake shake .... no dont bother with the net on this one.. shak shake! </p><p>P.S. wile driving alone in 8 feet of water i saw a Gobie that had to be 20 inchs fighting with what looked like was a fresh water lobster! </p>
Edited by bradley894 7/8/2010 4:03 PM
|
|
| |