I think he nailed it.

i don't hear that many people hate the new technology, except maybe Randy B. I would really like to have it, but not ready to spend that kind of money when I have to.. Get house painted, Save for Vacation, Wedding, Buy new furniture, etc... I have to say I am in awe of the fishermen that can really capitalize on it and learn it like they have.

I think the author comparing tournament fishing using forward facing sonar to fun fishing is like comparing flying an F-16 to flying a Cessna 172.

Passion and enjoyment of the endeavor has many levels.

The couple kids that fish with me think it's cool but could care less about having it. They just like to fish. I like it more than most evidently. To me the biggest issue is the cost. If anybody is being honest livescope is dominating the tournament industry. That causes people to look at it and say it's just to expensive to compete anymore. That segment is growing and will get worse. Part of the boom of boat sells and the whole industry is fomo, and trying to keep up with the latest stuff. Thats all good, it's actually great marketing. Kind of like how a vehicle manufacture won't let a new model out with every option the first few years and will add in a few each year until they end up with everything. People will trade up more often. Not to be negative but we are totally being played by manufacturers. It seems to have slowed the last 2 years because we may be at that point until who knows what comes out next. I think it still will end up pricing people away from the sport. Not that it can't be done cheaply and still have fun but the perception is there from an industry standpoint that ypu "need" all that to have fun

So im relatively new to bass fishing. Got serious and got my boat in 2014/2015. When I got in Side Imaging was just blowing up and I always wanted it because I find it genuinely intriguing to see the structure underwater I am unable to see with my own eyes...some of nature under water so to say. To have technology that would let me feel like aquaman with underwater vision is an amazing.

Even while SI was blowing up, i had heard about the great lakes guys killing the smallies "video game fishing" with 2d sonar. The idea of that made me want a lowrance specifically for my bow because all my research up to that time said they had the best 2d at the time. So i got a lowrance on the bow. Yea....I wasnt the 2d wizard those other guys able to "video game fish" were despite how easy they made it look. 2d is old technology....but there were guys that mastered it to the point of literally looking at fish with a sonar beam, casting at them, watching their bait fall to the fish they spotted and then catching them. Sounds exactly what the livescope wizards are doing too. So whats so different?

The guy makes tons of generalizations like being "glued to the graph" instead of focusing in on nature? I use my graphs a lot. But I dont start my motor, then start idling from the ramp staring at my graph until i find fish. I start my motor and use my instincts to find spots that look juicy and then start graphing....exactly like I expect to do if i do get Livescope. I think some have it twisted cuz you think because Josh Jones said he scans hours....that that means hes wandering around the lake aimlessly. I highly doubt that. Livescope is such a narrow beam.....and still sonar, not like a picture, so it still needs to be interpreted to know what you are looking at.....how much water do you think you can cover scanning around a point or underwater hump and how long will that take? I imagine the narrow beam makes it tedious. and its not like SI and DI where you are covering swaths of water. So just cuz theyre scanning for hours doesnt mean they arent using nature (I think its a lot more mapping then we are currently giving it credit for...but thats a whole new debate 🤷‍♂️).

The guy claims that people hes talked to hate it/dont like it.....who could imagine that? I could....and I have examples why. Pretty much any Josh Jones or Live Imaging thread....pretty easy to see a hard line in the sand and people will stand on 1 of 2 of those sides. So of course people hes talked to dont like it.....because he doesnt like it. Birds of a feather flock together.

The other thing I think is funny is the post makes it read like LiveScoping turns us all into a combination of Josh Jones and Jacob Wheeler if you buy a livescope. Kinda like i remember reading/hearing about 2D Video game fishing when I got my boat and more serious into bass fishing.....but I learned that its not as easy as the articles say. I think its the same with Livescope. I was at Ivie that first winter. I literally had no idea that many people owned live technology at that point.....i stayed at elm and you have no idea how many Livescopes i saw....and this was BEFORE all this stuff blew up. I was there i think 4 days. No one, not even JJ or Jimmy Houston, caught a DD the entire time I was there....despite all the livescopes in the water. Why.....because maybe "video game fishing" isnt as easy or as bad for the sport as some like to claim! Miliken has posted a couple fishing vids where he synced his livescope to the fishing/casting........it kinda pushed me back off the edge....because it DID NOT look easy at all. Looked like you are looking for vertical rice grains and keep your beam pointed at them.....and your bait...then hope that it bites if you can nail the cast and retrieve depth.

So yea, theres my article


Nobody hit me with a TLDR if you read the linked article!!! LOL

to add to my dissertation....

I think the author is overlooking the fact that not everyone gives a [censored] about tech. You know we ALL know fishermen who dont have all the tech, dont want all the tech...and genuinely dont give a [censored] about all the new tech, and still catch fish and are 100% content with that. Its a specific person who not only cares about what technology someone else decides to put in their boat, but also what they themselves decide to put in their boat. Not even all bass guys care about tech....its only the hardcores...we just all seem to congregate in similar places and think our sentiments are the same as the general public.

I would agree with you if he had actually made that comparison but he did not. He compared the technology with video games like xbox for the younger generation and the failure to provide the youth with a healthy balance and alternative.

That's not the way I interpreted the article.

I also look for good ‘fishy’ spots and then use the Livescope. I can find em, but can’t make them bite. One of the good things I get from Livescope is when I find a spot that looks good, and the scope shows no fish, I don’t waste a bunch of time there.

That is my philosphy as well. It certainly allows you to fish more efficiently and not waste time in a spot casting to no fish.

Trust me. Tournament anglers DONT hate it. They would if they had to buy it, but they don’t. Maybe they don’t fully understand what they are seeing.

It’s $1500! It ain’t the end of the free world. Nobody bitches about trolling motors costing twice that and more. It is cheap enough to have it on every boat.

And yes…it works. I have won enough money to pay for it in the first tourney I fished with it. Last Tuesday, I more than lapped the field with it. It wasn’t close on second place. But! I wasn’t the only boat with it. Maybe I was the only guy that knew how to use it! Which is what I suspect causes a lot of butt hurt anglers. They would buy fish to weigh in if they could. They buy FFS. They just don’t know what they are looking at is my guess.

I agree with the article.

Is he right? I don’t know… golf capped club technology on the pro tour, baseball and softball bats are regulated by some leagues. Is this the point the line is drawn? Probably not.

I will say this, as much as I wished it wasn’t the case, if you don’t have FFS your are at a disadvantage to your competition. After having a chance to use 2 different brands now it’s become obvious to me just how much benefit it provides… way more than just looking at/for fish.