As always the PFTS will remain a slam (snook, redfish, trout) tournament. In every event the largest slam wins.

In the past if no slam was caught the winnner fell to whatever angler caught the three largest fish.

That will change in the PFTS in 2009-2010. In future events the largest of 2/3 of a slam will beat out the three largest fish.

For Example-

Rik catches a 20" trout and a 25" snook, I catch three reds totaling 90". Who wins? Rik does based on his 2/3 of a slam. So you could sit on a redfish hole all day and catch 90" of redfish but the guy with any amount of 2/3 of a slam will win in next years event.

If no 2/3 of a slam is caught than three largest fish will still win.

Thank you for being generous.

The above scenario is absurb. Todd catches 90"s and Rik catches 45". much less two fish?? Come on



I like the change, wonder how it came about????

My guess is that someone whined long and loud.

and it is your site

Correction - our site

I think it is a great plan. I know that anyone could easily catch 200" of trout. It takes alot more talent to add a red and a snook in the mix.

The rule change came from the DOA tournament I recently attended. When they said how the event would be scored I had a "Well why didn't I think of that" moment.

It forces anglers to change tactics and not sit on one hole all day. Lets hope it works.

I think it is a good change. The Perico event was a good example of the reasoning behind it.

Not knocking the winners of that event at all. They caught more fish of any type than I did and they fished - and won - within the rules at the time. Got that guys (redfisher, fishmaster & countryboy)? Set that hair on your neck back down.

For what we try to create - a challenge - this new rule is a good rule.

I think a good way to do it would be the slam first. If that don't happen then the best 2 species total. Then if that don't happen divide it 3 ways for the best fish in each catagory.

Sounds good to me

If no one catches two than it reverets back to total inches.

First-Slam (snook, redfish, trout)

If no slam caught-

Second-2/3 of a slam.

If no 2/3 caught-

Third-largest total of three fish. Snook is first, three redfish is second, three trout is third.

The original rule came about because the OLC was always a three biggest fish tournament. When the PFTS was born from the OLC I changed it to a slam tournament. Catching a slam causes an angler to think outside the box and chnage tactics and areas within the boundaries.

But what if one person catches a 29" trout and a 14"red. Another person catches a 30 Snook and a 14" red. Isn't the guy with the trout & Red combo truly a better catch., due to the fact that the Snook is just average and the trout is a Gator ?
I don't know how you guys put up with all these stupid questions. Before Rik says" what's it matter to you , you never show up to these events anyway" I'm bored and it's a rainy night figured I'd pour some gas on the fire.

What's it matter to you , you never show up to these events anyway.

I did once, even have the trophy to prove it. I'd go to more of them but checkin is always so damn early. Nobody ever catches a fish before 9:30 anyway so why is check in at O dark thirty ? Now a brunch tournament, a few bloody mary's couple of plates of food. Then a nice padle around in the sunshine, little nap out on some island. Sounds much more civilized.

Shamus - you are the man, dude.
(And I was there when you rec'd that trophy!)

Any idiot can catch a quality fish early in the morning. It takes real men and women to catch fish in the middle of the day.

Let's just plan our own Brunch Tourney. (SOTE, of course.) I think I already have two sponsors.

I think that is a good idea, not that anyone asked for my opinion. Shamus does bring up a good point, and I have always been of the opinion that it goes in this order of "bestest": Snook, Red, Trout. Certainly a 24 inch trout is better than a 24 inch snook, but you really can over complicate the whole thing. So you have to set some sort of rules to follow, and that way it is fair for everyone. As long as everyone understands them going in......that is actually the hardest part.

Does a straight flush still beat four of a kind?

Who is this Erick guy and why do I need his opinion?

Speak for yourself! With that kind of attitude, no wonder why the new rod broke!

BTW, i like the rule change

I never slam, or even place so it doesn't matter to me. It's always fun regardless.

(now if they'll just ease up on the all important Bluetooth rule... )

Wouldn't that be "three of a different kind"?

Cisco..Just wear a buff and stuff your cell phone inside it.

hmmm. That couuuld work, or... I could just pull my buff over the Bluet....

You are indeed a wise man Sir Spectaculous.

What is the reason for the bluetooth rule? I used to always fish with it just so I could answer the phone without getting the cell out of the waterproof bag. (Till I lost it - the bluetooth)