Jump to content
32 replies to this topic
Posted 28 December 2008 - 06:03 PM
Ok this is just a theory of mine. When a fish attacks its prey it goes for the eyes, the head of the bait. So, when there are dots on the lure it resembles an eye, therefore the fish attacks it. So if the placement of a dot was placed rite in line with the hooks there will be a greater chance of the fish getting hooked.
Well what you guys think of this?
Posted 28 December 2008 - 07:20 PM
In theory thats what should happen, IMHO .However i,m sure there are guys on here that have spent some time and effort on this sudject,sure you,ll here more on this.
Posted 28 December 2008 - 08:27 PM
look at wild tropical fish, the spot is more enlarged and noticable than the real eye. might be worth doing the same.
Posted 28 December 2008 - 08:49 PM
Well, as fare as the eye on tropical fish being larger , it's more of a self defence thing. The BIG fish sees some little fish he may want to eat, The little fish trys to make him or her self look BIGGER and more FEARCE, in hops of not getting eaten.
Got the consept.
Posted 28 December 2008 - 11:43 PM
Alot of fish also have evolved to have eye spots near the tail as well. It's much less lethal to have your tail bitten than your head!
On my baits I normally put kill spots in the middle of the bait. I look at it like shooting at a target. you should always try to get the center of mass so there is greater chance of hitting something if you're off a bit. Not sure if it truely makes a difference but I'll keep putting them on!
Posted 29 December 2008 - 12:26 AM
You really have to think about how the spot got there and analyse why it is still there?
According to Darwinian theory, the spot would originally have been a mutation of the genes or accident of nature. If the spot was a disadvantage in the survival of the fish, then the spotted fish would not survive to breed. The fact that the spot is fairly common amongst fish species, proves that the spot aids the fishes survival.
Next, what purpose does the spot serve?
(a) It could either help the fish swim, (b)aid reproduction by attracting a mate, © it repels its predators.
Chances are that it is a combination of ( and ©. Because it is is successful at repelling predators, it becomes an attractive feature for a mate.
So, does it work by making the predator think that the bait is too large and scare the attacker away, or does it make the predator miss, by thinking the bait is larger than it thought and misses with the bite attack.
Either way, nature tells us that it is a successful ploy, so we have to ask, is a spot a good idea at all.
Just food for thought.
Edited by Vodkaman, 29 December 2008 - 12:28 AM.
Posted 29 December 2008 - 12:44 AM
It is crucial that the kill spot is clearly visible on the bait, the location is unimportant. The predator fish thus becomes preoccupied with the spot while in pursuit to such a degree it fails to notice the metal contraptions (hooks) hanging off the lure, and as a result willing takes the bait.
Posted 29 December 2008 - 12:47 AM
I was starting to think the same thing after thinking about it. But then today i was talking to some people at my bait shop and the people said that if the lure doesnt have the dot on it then it wont catch fish.
Edited by spoopa, 29 December 2008 - 12:52 AM.
Posted 29 December 2008 - 02:31 AM
I usually don't put kill spots on my lures(haven't bothered about it so far) , but I still do catch fish on them !
Maybe , if I would paint on such spots , I'd catch more ?
Just can't imagine , that such a little spot could make a big difference , but I am surely ready to learn........!
greetz , diemai
Posted 29 December 2008 - 02:33 AM
I've seen baits without spots that caught fish, and baits with them that did not. And vice versa. A hungry bass may eat anything alive that it can get in its mouth. When they're not hungry, a bait resembling natural prey may get them to eat opportunistically. I usually add them to baits patterned after minnows or sunfish but I don't go crazy with size or position. I think of it as one more feature that makes a bait look more natural.
Posted 29 December 2008 - 03:39 AM
The guys in your shop I think are misleading somewhat with a statement like 'a bait without a spot will not catch'. I am sure a spot of some description is an advantage under certain circumstance, it is not however a necessity. A spot is nothing more than a 'Come On' and could potentially make the difference between a fish taking and not taking, I don't think a fish 'aims' for a spot, the spot just guides it in the right direction. most of my lures have a mark which is usually red or orange in colour (I am convinced fish react to red) and these are always under the bait at the front, middle or back and sometimes on the side, never on top.
When I come back in the next life as a fish I'll let you know the answer .
Posted 29 December 2008 - 05:10 AM
Spoopa, I suggest the guys in the tackle shop have more interest in your $, than you catching fish, I have put spots on lures (about 25 years ago), never made much difference, a bit like stripes, on the day they may be dynamite.
I prefer KC's, Phil, and V/mans theories, they sound logical!!.
As for me, I am covered in spots (freckles), and these are failing to induce any mating impulses in the local females here, and I am still alive, so there goes the 'Kill Spot' theory.pete
Posted 29 December 2008 - 06:26 AM
great thread pete. i normally put a spot on my tennessee shad . others we depend upon contrast bars. we do put red under the throat and on the undeside of the tail. im still chuckling at your post .,,, about the girlies.
Posted 29 December 2008 - 06:26 AM
I wonder if we sometimes are unconsciously developing theories based on some bad dreams we've had in the past.
I can tell you that there is not a single type of minnow in the area I fish, that has developed a kill spot. Apart trout which has a lot of spots (but you would not call them "kill spots", I think), there are no such small fish here. Some of the fish would develop several spots but this happens only during the mating season (the european chub, for instance). So the theory developped by Vodkaman is right, I think. In fact, his theory is the most logical of all. But we are already used to that.
I think lurebuilders shoud not concentrate on kill spots, but rather on action, color mix, depth, etc.
So why is still the kill spot a problem for debate? I think this happens only because in the US waters there are some minnows with a kill spot and the lurebuilders try to copy them. If so, I would understand the fact that lurebuilders in the US make some minnow lures with a kill spot. But would they put a kill spot on a catfish-like lure?
Finally, I think that the most important think for a lurebuilder is that he has confidence in his lures, no matter if they have a kill spot or not.
Posted 29 December 2008 - 07:32 AM
with you living in Pueblo West I bet you are refering to the spot on gizzard shad. (P-lo Res is full of them). The spot on shad is a False eye used in its defense against predators! If you have a school of 100 shad there are 200 eyes, and 200 "false eyes". These false eyes confuse predators in two ways 1. making them think there are more shad than are actually there. 2. making them look bigger!
As far as needing them on baits I would say this is false unless the bite is real tough. (like it can get a P-lo) It a confidence thing!!
Posted 29 December 2008 - 10:12 AM
Does the "kill spot" look like a spot to the fish?? .........when you are burning the bait?? I'm wandering what the fish sees with the bait in motion. Different speeds would add more confusion as would different bait styles..........more roll.....tighter ocsilation tail to nose etc. Suspending baits with no movement the spot would actually look like a spot otherwise I think it would "look" like a black line depending the direction of the baits "main" oscilation
Posted 29 December 2008 - 12:18 PM
i believe that jflures is dead on.....if a spot(or for that matter anything else) gives you confidence you will catch more fish on it....if for no other reason the one you have confidence in is the one you'll throw the most nugene
Posted 29 December 2008 - 12:55 PM
I'm not entirely convinced the spots on shad are false eyes to confuse predators since the spots are often small and indistinct. It could be related to maintaining position in a school or reproduction, etc. Or all of the above! The only thing that matters is whether bass more readily bite a shad with spot than without. Some guys report bass refusing a bait until they put on a spot with a Sharpie pen. But that's just anecdotal evidence (i.e. a fish tale) until someone comes up with more rigorous scientific evidence. I personally believe the spots can't hurt and sometimes may help, so I put them on.
Posted 29 December 2008 - 01:10 PM
Thanks for all the help guys:worship:
Yes i am fishing the peublo resavoir, mainly for wipers (hybrid stripers)
One thing that i do remember on my first couple lures i made is that i made one of them with a dot on it. The lure did not catch many fish but the fish it caught were larger fish. I did the paint job and the size of the body the same, just added a killspot. So the killspot turned the smaller fish away and only the larger ones went for it. So i am wondering is if this was due to the killspot or just fishing? Oh ya my dad was fishing and he got hit by smaller fish.
Posted 29 December 2008 - 01:38 PM
Spoopa, your experience fits in with the eye theory nicely. But, as you hinted, hardly conclusive, still enchouraging.