Of Fishing and Computers

Do you ever have one of those moments when you read or hear something and it immediately triggers a reaction in you? I just read a post over on the BFHP that did this to me concerning a website that offers for sale a "program" of some sorts that using input from the user will predict location and baits for bass fishing. There are numerous iterations of databases, programs, logs and such available on the Net for those looking for them. In this case though I want to talk about just the topic of computer programs and bass fishing.

OK, personal boring flashback to where my love of science and understanding takes root. I'm an 'Old Skool' Star Trek fan going way back to when I was a kid. And of all the characters in the series I could most relate to, First Officer and Science Officer Spock was the one who fascinated me the most. The thought of every situation encountered or decision made being able to be answered 'logically', devoid of emotional constraints was incredibly compelling.

So it probably predictably came to follow that when I got hooked on bass fishing at an early age while in High School, I would also gravitate toward an angler that represented a very similar 'role model' when viewed in terms of approach and reason. That person, for me, turned out to be Rick Clunn.

Rick, before he turned professional bass fisherman, was a computer programmer inTexas for Exxon. Not surprisingly, he developed a system for locating and catching bass that came to be known as Seasonal Patterns. It might be the single most important 'concept' to ever be espoused in bass fishing, at least in terms of influence. Though not exactly a computer program per se, it was a very defined approach to bass fishing success, a road map that could easily be followed once understood. In terms of computer modeling it actually transcended the boundaries of a keyboard by having the right balance between defined and undefined parameters (IMO).

And computer programs for locating and catching bass aren't new. In fact, I still have BASSMaster magazines sititng at home from the 80's that had one Bill Dance and Roland Martin promoting the greatest thing since sliced bread in bass fishing success. It was called 'Basstronics' and was a simple input database about the size of a paper graph that mounted in your boat and with some simple 'conditional' inputs on your part would spit out the color, type, size and retrieve of lure Bill and Roland would use in various fishing situations. Like all the knowledge of two of bass fishings greatest minds in a box at your disposal. And of course it didn't catch on. And that's because you can't cram fishing variables into a cut and dried computer program and get catch results above anything that you couldn't get with some reading and study or record keeping on your own.

It comes down to a nearly unlimited number of variables and a subsequent nearly unlimited number of resulting outcomes. In the engineering and modeling world it is known as 'degrees of freedom'. Basically put, the more degrees of freedom your system has and the better it can explain the past, the worse it will be for predicting the future, and the future is what we are always striving for in bass fishing. The fish you have yet to catch is always in the future. For a simple read and explanation about this concept see the following links:

BUILDING PREDICTIVE MODELS: PART I

PREDICTIVE MODELS PART II: EVALUATING GOODNESS-OF-FIT

There is a huge volume of work in the Artificial Intelligence (AI) field that can similarly be researched and cross-applied to the bass fishing puzzle. I've read a lot on the subject in my quest for fishing success. The one thing that the computer can never do, at least not yet, is to think and feel about a certain scenario. It can't capture every single variable that one is to encounter or know every single past outcome that has resulted. It can never replace experience and the power of the human mind. The bass fishing world is too large, too dynamic. It can't be categorized. The single greatest book on the subject I have come across is Mind Over Machine by Dreyfus and Dreyfus. A particular chapter in the book entitled '5 Steps from Novice to Expert' might be the best piece of cross-applied writing in print. I know, heady stuff, but I've had that chapter copied and studied in my library archives for 2 decades now and I still go back and re-read frequently.

And this was the beauty with Rick Clunn's 'Seasonal Patterns' approach, or In-Fisherman's 'F+L+P=S' formula. They defined a simple yet critical few parameters to be followed with plenty of room for experience and intuition to be applied, stuff that no computer program could ever duplicate.   

 

Comments

[Richard Ziert]

First off - Thank you. Very well done.

Then I would have to say:

"Live long and prosper" or
Prosper and live even longer?

Sometimes direct, sometimes indirect, sometimes subliminal, the answers are always within us. We just have to find them.

It depends on how we look at things as individuals, and whether or not we can bring ourselves to grow beyond our innate prejudices and communication filters?

Should those future bass you mentioned be thought of as already caught?

Logic has no place in science without philosophy. Once we really get into philosophy we find it to be quite logical?

No, I'm not talking in riddles.

I'm not trying to freak or Zen anybody out (grasshopper). It's merely an oblique way of providing questions - of sorts -that need answering from within. The internal answer may be equally oblique and lay dormant until a later date. . . but it will come.

I'd be very much surprised if Rick Clunn didn't have undefined parameters in answering these and other would be questions. I know for a fact that the Lindner brothers are very much into philosophy in their search for the truth. The ultimate success of all these and all other people depends on it.

"The truly wise mans knows only one thing for certain. He knows he really doesn't know anything."

Here's a book for you:

"Sophies World" by Jostein Gaarder
Farrar . Straus . Giroux - New York

LCCN # 2006934351

No it's not an occult book. It's a novel about the history of philosophy.

Read it, and grow beyond what you think you know. Read it, and know for sure that you know nothing.

Take care & keep it wet.

Rich

[Big Indiana Bass]

Thanks for the book recommendation.

"Read it, and know for sure you know nothing". I've studied quantum physics a bit and so I already know that I know nothing (LOL). Quantum physics principles being a little easier for me to get a grasp on than philosophy, though I have done some study there also.

Wise men have been arguing philosophical variations for 1000's of years, and yet the bass I will chase this weekend will still bite my crankbait, ignorant of the discussions. These wise men will argue that the bass I catch doesn't really exist, or perhaps only exists in my imagination. Or greater still whether the lake that I angle upon and the experience I will have even truly exists at all, still I will catch.

You're right, you can't separate philososphy, science and logic from each other in the 'Big Picture'. But tomorrow I fish, therefore I am!

[Richard Ziert]

Not mincing beliefs by any means. I clearly respect yours and all others. Thank you for putting up with mine. LOL

"These wise men will argue that the bass I catch doesn't really exist, or perhaps only exists in my imagination. Or greater still whether the lake that I angle upon and the experience I will have even truly exists at all, still I will catch."

We catch those real fish - even imaginary, or future fish only through an inborn intuition or involuntary function beyond day to day living. These are the ideas beyond collective reason based on our life xperiences. . . and it is not merely subjective feelings , sensory experience, or even the universal language of math.

So too do the fish live by experience, spirit, and operant conditioning - but without any IDEAS of the future. . . or math. LOL

All this hocus pocus stuff can be utilized by fishermen when we think of fishing as natural for the fish AS IT CAN BE FOR THE FISH. Tired cliche I know, but what we need to do is not just think like a fish, but try to imagine living like one overall.

I feel the better fishermen know exactly what I'm talking about even though it may never have crossed their minds (Rick Clunn?). But, poignantly speaking, that's the point. I feel that the better fishermen that get wrapped up in catching fish without going deeper into the whys and wherefores, are not doing justice to their own natural cognizance; becoming Au Fiat with all that is naturally offered to them. It is clear to me anyway, that all fishermen would be better at what they do if they at least looked inside that philosophical door. . . But then, what do I know? LOL

Except for that which is God given, we are all in a world or our own choosing or making , and then again, reward as well as consequences.

The only diff is that some excel - some don't. Some listen to those who would have you stand still. Some listen to those who would have you become much better than you are. Some listen to no one.

Take care & keep it wet.

Rich

[Big Indiana Bass]

I actually agree with you and the potential value of looking at the philosophical side of things fishing/performance related once you reach a certain level of skill. This actually ties in very nicely with the book I mentioned and the "5 steps". Anyone at the level in the first 3 steps need not worry about it as they haven't advanced far enough yet in their "journey" as an angler. It is once you try and make that critical leap to Step 4 (Proficiency) that the mental and philosophical (intuitive) picture can be developed, and of course especially in step 5 (Expertise).

My response was partly tongue-in-cheek, as there are a lot of different philosophical bases out there, many of which do spend a lot of time discussing the concepts of reality and experience. I suppose you could make various arguments as to how applicable they may be in a practical sense to the "real world". I do tend to draw the line though myself when getting into such things as "thinking like a fish" (LOL).

As always, I appreciate the discussion...

[Richard Ziert]

Just so's you know what I'm talking about makes a little more sense, I found an article I wrote many years ago for another sight. Take what I said above, hold it tightly as you go through what follows. I guess I've always been freaky?

http://www.worldrecordbass.com/article.asp?ID=81

Take care and keep it wet.

Rich