J Buck wrote in message
...
If I was to chart it, it would, as expected, resemble the typical
pyramid shape. More 12" than 13", more 13 than 14, and so on and so
forth

Most fishermen I know, when you ask them "how big was it?" go by length,
yet on this group, weight seems to be the overriding dimension. I
understand that, in terms of records...but I can get a lot better handle
on how 'big' a fish is by it's length (which is more of a visual thing)
than weight.

Actually, I keep my records by length and don't weigh any bass unless I
think it's four pounds or more. I've memorized the NY length-weight tables
and just estimate the weights. I've learned to compensate roughly for
differences in girth, plus weights aren't that important to me, at least for
the ones three pounds and less. Which should not be taken to mean that I
don't get a great kick out of catching three-pounders.