angling times
Posted: April 8th, 2011, 12:00 am
There are rumours flying around that AT will be pulling the plug on the winter league in the not so distant future, only rumours !!!
Page 2 of 4
angling times
Posted: April 8th, 2011, 12:15 am
We won the Upper Trent WL a few times years ago. From what I remember the monetary gain was very little. Anybody got any sort of rough idea re how much todays teams get for winning their WLs or does it vary from league to league
angling times
Posted: April 8th, 2011, 12:26 am
Good question, from a personal note I have never recieved any money for being in a team winning the AT winter league division.
angling times
Posted: April 8th, 2011, 5:20 am
No money for winning league or semi unless the league you fish builds it into their league
angling times
Posted: April 8th, 2011, 6:31 am
Is there a set pools amount for atwl
No...the league decides what pools are fished for.
I think £13 pools a match would be good if the venues accepted £2 peg fee, £1 to AT then £10 pools.
angling times
Posted: April 8th, 2011, 10:04 am
Why £1 to AT.
That League I ran last winter I paid £300 to the winning team, £200 for the second and £100 for third. All for £12 on the day. Entry was £10 per team of five (one-off). Also paid top five £100 for winner and down the scale plus £30 every five anglers. Also paid £50 to the aggregate winner.
If you don't pay team money in a team match what is the crappity smack point??? or have I missed it.
OK the semi finals; I have fished quite a few of these years back all they did was cost an arm and a leg.
I remember running a Shakespeare Six final at Wood Eaton the very samwe day as the Final of the WL. Loads qualified for both but everyone turned up for the Shakespeare Six Final because it was cheaper and the payout was much bigger.
I think some just like giving mney away without knowing what is happening to it. If this is the case feel free to send me some. I'll tell yers what I will spend it on
That League I ran last winter I paid £300 to the winning team, £200 for the second and £100 for third. All for £12 on the day. Entry was £10 per team of five (one-off). Also paid top five £100 for winner and down the scale plus £30 every five anglers. Also paid £50 to the aggregate winner.
If you don't pay team money in a team match what is the crappity smack point??? or have I missed it.
OK the semi finals; I have fished quite a few of these years back all they did was cost an arm and a leg.
I remember running a Shakespeare Six final at Wood Eaton the very samwe day as the Final of the WL. Loads qualified for both but everyone turned up for the Shakespeare Six Final because it was cheaper and the payout was much bigger.
I think some just like giving mney away without knowing what is happening to it. If this is the case feel free to send me some. I'll tell yers what I will spend it on
angling times
Posted: April 8th, 2011, 12:03 pm
team fishing needs without a shadow of dought a group of organisers if you like a governing body to put together a series of matches around the center of the country its no good trying to go north,south,east and west as thats been tried before and the cost of fuel is already affecting competitions i'm sure its a big contribution towards the cancellation of the maver pairs
pools should be standardised for a competition like this at £20 and so should peg fee's at no more than £4 or £5
pools should be standardised for a competition like this at £20 and so should peg fee's at no more than £4 or £5
angling times
Posted: April 8th, 2011, 9:50 pm
i agree with all the comments about the cost of alot of matches/leagues being to expensive. it's no coincidence that alot of AT leagues are struggling/folded as costs have increased. i go fishing to have an enjoyable day not to win money-thats a bonus. i enjoy team fishing too especially the crack that goes with it. but when the expense gets to much it's hard to justify and enjoy it the same. some take it way to serious too which maybe due to the amount of money laid out. the wigan winter league is probably the cheapest to fish in the country £10 pools on the day + £1 to go to pub landlord for a brew. bait is mainly bread/worm with a few squatts casters etc. it's also one of the biggest in the country with 14 teams. i would not like to see anyone priced out of being able to go fishing so that someone who can afford it can win even more which im sure is happening at the moment.
angling times
Posted: April 8th, 2011, 11:24 pm
i agree with all the comments about the cost of alot of matches/leagues being to expensive. it's no coincidence that alot of AT leagues are struggling/folded as costs have increased. i go fishing to have an enjoyable day not to win money-thats a bonus. i enjoy team fishing too especially the crack that goes with it. but when the expense gets to much it's hard to justify and enjoy it the same. some take it way to serious too which maybe due to the amount of money laid out. the wigan winter league is probably the cheapest to fish in the country £10 pools on the day + £1 to go to pub landlord for a brew. bait is mainly bread/worm with a few squatts casters etc. it's also one of the biggest in the country with 14 teams. i would not like to see anyone priced out of being able to go fishing so that someone who can afford it can win even more which im sure is happening at the moment.
Spot on
angling times
Posted: April 9th, 2011, 10:59 am
crappity smack you, someone may hook a chub and there will belittle onn,
angling times
Posted: April 9th, 2011, 5:08 pm
sorry lads but we thought there may be a call for an Angling times winter league out there in Staffordshire....
We thought that teams like Trabucco, Eclipse, Wolves, Bilston Angling centre, Dudley bait, etc etc And the teams from the Cheshire league might want a chance at getting there...obviously we were wrong.
We thought that teams like Trabucco, Eclipse, Wolves, Bilston Angling centre, Dudley bait, etc etc And the teams from the Cheshire league might want a chance at getting there...obviously we were wrong.
angling times
Posted: April 9th, 2011, 5:22 pm
Why £1 to AT.
Its the cost of getting to a semi final or final Bill.
Thats why the £2 peg fee instead of £3....therefore the club pays the AT fee instead of the angler.
I can understand your loyalties to AM Bill but we are trying to give anglers the option of a cheaper division of the country's biggest team competition
angling times
Posted: April 9th, 2011, 6:07 pm
Woodlark,
The are obviously varying opinions on this.
One thing for sure my opinion is nothing whatsoever to do with AM although I could not run of the Leagues for obvious reasons.Our
team entry is nothing really to do with me, Fred looks after the Eclipse team now but I think we all have pretty much the same thoughts on this.
I simply can not understand having a League, ie team matches that do not pay team money, to me that is crazy.
OK you put the emphasis on reaching the semi final stage but I certainly don't think our side would be keen on that either as other baits (OK I think most us don't want worm matches now) come into it and we are sent off to some non-descript venue that quite simply we do not want to go to.
I asked why £1 to AT (isn't it £60 in reality) because what did anybody pay in the now defunct Drennan League (for the record that was run by AM and didn't really interest me either!). Also for the reason mentioned in the previous paragraph, if you see what I mean; in essence are we not paying £60 with no chance of any return whatsoever.
I know opinions vary but we (probably most of us anyway) rate the National Championships far more in prestigious terms than any winter league. Respect
The are obviously varying opinions on this.
One thing for sure my opinion is nothing whatsoever to do with AM although I could not run of the Leagues for obvious reasons.Our
team entry is nothing really to do with me, Fred looks after the Eclipse team now but I think we all have pretty much the same thoughts on this.
I simply can not understand having a League, ie team matches that do not pay team money, to me that is crazy.
OK you put the emphasis on reaching the semi final stage but I certainly don't think our side would be keen on that either as other baits (OK I think most us don't want worm matches now) come into it and we are sent off to some non-descript venue that quite simply we do not want to go to.
I asked why £1 to AT (isn't it £60 in reality) because what did anybody pay in the now defunct Drennan League (for the record that was run by AM and didn't really interest me either!). Also for the reason mentioned in the previous paragraph, if you see what I mean; in essence are we not paying £60 with no chance of any return whatsoever.
I know opinions vary but we (probably most of us anyway) rate the National Championships far more in prestigious terms than any winter league. Respect
angling times
Posted: April 9th, 2011, 8:45 pm
we all realise the at winter league has come in for a lot of criticism over the years but i think a competition of this type is vital for match fishing.Without it there would hardly be a need for a team of 12 plus anglers except for a natonal which is hardly good value for an average team.It also keeps anglers commited at a time of year when enthusiasm may be waning.I think match fishing without a healthy number of clubs/match groups would be poorer for it and anything that encourages a group of anglers getting out and helping each other must be supported despite the shortcomings.
angling times
Posted: April 10th, 2011, 3:51 am
Woodlark,
The are obviously varying opinions on this.
One thing for sure my opinion is nothing whatsoever to do with AM although I could not run of the Leagues for obvious reasons.Our
team entry is nothing really to do with me, Fred looks after the Eclipse team now but I think we all have pretty much the same thoughts on this.
I simply can not understand having a League, ie team matches that do not pay team money, to me that is crazy.
OK you put the emphasis on reaching the semi final stage but I certainly don't think our side would be keen on that either as other baits (OK I think most us don't want worm matches now) come into it and we are sent off to some non-descript venue that quite simply we do not want to go to.
I asked why £1 to AT (isn't it £60 in reality) because what did anybody pay in the now defunct Drennan League (for the record that was run by AM and didn't really interest me either!). Also for the reason mentioned in the previous paragraph, if you see what I mean; in essence are we not paying £60 with no chance of any return whatsoever.
I know opinions vary but we (probably most of us anyway) rate the National Championships far more in prestigious terms than any winter league. Respect
£60 to fish Angling times winter league.....how much is first prize?..is it £10,000 or something like that?
How much to fish a national (£250 a team in angling trust for starters) and how much do the winners get?.....and then they have a fish off at Evesham that costs an absolute fortune with bloodworm and joker over two days.
angling times
Posted: April 10th, 2011, 10:14 am
Woodglue,
It's all opinion. The National Championships holds more clout than any other match (I think the clue is in the title). To me it is a complete one off; must admit I am not interested, (personally) in the match afterwards but you can not blame Angling Trust when a company chucks £10,000 at them.
In my view pool money should be spread about and this includes paying either one team in every round of a league match or three or four teams overall at the end of the League.
I have fished many an AT League and have enjoyed them. In the old days the rewards were much greater pro rata; even reporters were paid to travel by plane to cover the final when it was on the Shannon.
Over the last two years I fished them we struggled to get a team. Doing a 100 mile round trip (thirty odd miles more for the Stoke lads) slowly loses its appeal especially when you go to venues looking for bites in darkest December and return home to see a pile of weights on your doorstep, ten minutes from home.
Over the last two years I have fished four different leagues in the winter, I ran one of them. It is far nearer for us (Nantwich is a spit over half an hour from my house). I only say as I see but I enjoy these Leagues far better, - they also pay team money as well and they are miles cheaper for those that want to continue team fishing within their means.
PS As far as I can recall we have entry fees paid for us in both the National and other big matches so I am unsure of entry fees, the £60 was only a gues to be honest.
It is a free choice; quite simply matches have to made attractive to attract anglers there; that is part of the job of an organiser, - I always tried to.
All I know is that if I ran a WL again this winter (hyperthetical because I have retired) I could very easily get over 100 on it if I wanted too, OK it restricts venues a bit.
If (again hyperthetically) I said it was an ATWL I would loose probably at least half the teams in one go; I know that is not fact but it is a bloody good guess.
Though you had packed up fishing anyway
See you at the site match unless you get bread banned
It's all opinion. The National Championships holds more clout than any other match (I think the clue is in the title). To me it is a complete one off; must admit I am not interested, (personally) in the match afterwards but you can not blame Angling Trust when a company chucks £10,000 at them.
In my view pool money should be spread about and this includes paying either one team in every round of a league match or three or four teams overall at the end of the League.
I have fished many an AT League and have enjoyed them. In the old days the rewards were much greater pro rata; even reporters were paid to travel by plane to cover the final when it was on the Shannon.
Over the last two years I fished them we struggled to get a team. Doing a 100 mile round trip (thirty odd miles more for the Stoke lads) slowly loses its appeal especially when you go to venues looking for bites in darkest December and return home to see a pile of weights on your doorstep, ten minutes from home.
Over the last two years I have fished four different leagues in the winter, I ran one of them. It is far nearer for us (Nantwich is a spit over half an hour from my house). I only say as I see but I enjoy these Leagues far better, - they also pay team money as well and they are miles cheaper for those that want to continue team fishing within their means.
PS As far as I can recall we have entry fees paid for us in both the National and other big matches so I am unsure of entry fees, the £60 was only a gues to be honest.
It is a free choice; quite simply matches have to made attractive to attract anglers there; that is part of the job of an organiser, - I always tried to.
All I know is that if I ran a WL again this winter (hyperthetical because I have retired) I could very easily get over 100 on it if I wanted too, OK it restricts venues a bit.
If (again hyperthetically) I said it was an ATWL I would loose probably at least half the teams in one go; I know that is not fact but it is a bloody good guess.
Though you had packed up fishing anyway
See you at the site match unless you get bread banned
angling times
Posted: April 10th, 2011, 12:43 pm
Seems like a good debate, so I might aswell chuck my ten pence in !!!!!
First of all Nationals.
We now appear to have come full circle, from the All England to 5/6 divisions back to just 2 divisions, which will soon be back to one.
Why has this happened ? Well cost, venues, teams struggling for anglers and apathy.
While I and many others were happy to see preston put money back into fishing the form it went into was an own goal and in my opinion would speed up the demise of the competition.
If you win the national, that's it, no need to have teams fishing in a spin off like they did at Evesham.
Down the years teams like Bill's, Southport, Osset, Gordon League have all enjoyed going to the World Clubs, representing their country and giving most of the team a once in a life time opportunity.
The fish off will take this away and be dominated by the elite teams.
I think the money would have been better in the shape of a captain morgan cup style comp, an FA type where any team could have entered and had a home draw against if you like Starlets !!!
This might have helped to combine the different sector's in which match fishing finds itself.
AT winter League.
Again this has suffered the same way and just does not carry the prestige it once had and I am sure in time will be finished.
AT is a bit different as the leagues were formed by anglers in their own area and it is / was the anglers who picked the venues to fish. This in turn leads to arguments (like the old drennan super league) as to where to fish and eventually teams drop out due to the aggro that goes with it.
The semi-finals cause all sorts of problems in respect to travelling, venues etc.
The final has now been moved from the river to some lakes at Milton Keynes and I dont think that will help.
So how will things change in top flight team fishing in regard to Nationals and AT Winter Leagues ?
I think the answer is they will all fade away and match fishing will be predominately individual with a few team comps.
I think when the likes of Billy Makin decided to introduce commercial fishing the writing was on the wall. It was only the die hard team match anglers who did not see it !! (I was one !).
We can debate all we like but match fishing is /will have changed completely by the end of this decade.
Of course people will still fish canals and river matches but as the average age is probably close to 50 at present, then the end of the decade is about right !!!!!
First of all Nationals.
We now appear to have come full circle, from the All England to 5/6 divisions back to just 2 divisions, which will soon be back to one.
Why has this happened ? Well cost, venues, teams struggling for anglers and apathy.
While I and many others were happy to see preston put money back into fishing the form it went into was an own goal and in my opinion would speed up the demise of the competition.
If you win the national, that's it, no need to have teams fishing in a spin off like they did at Evesham.
Down the years teams like Bill's, Southport, Osset, Gordon League have all enjoyed going to the World Clubs, representing their country and giving most of the team a once in a life time opportunity.
The fish off will take this away and be dominated by the elite teams.
I think the money would have been better in the shape of a captain morgan cup style comp, an FA type where any team could have entered and had a home draw against if you like Starlets !!!
This might have helped to combine the different sector's in which match fishing finds itself.
AT winter League.
Again this has suffered the same way and just does not carry the prestige it once had and I am sure in time will be finished.
AT is a bit different as the leagues were formed by anglers in their own area and it is / was the anglers who picked the venues to fish. This in turn leads to arguments (like the old drennan super league) as to where to fish and eventually teams drop out due to the aggro that goes with it.
The semi-finals cause all sorts of problems in respect to travelling, venues etc.
The final has now been moved from the river to some lakes at Milton Keynes and I dont think that will help.
So how will things change in top flight team fishing in regard to Nationals and AT Winter Leagues ?
I think the answer is they will all fade away and match fishing will be predominately individual with a few team comps.
I think when the likes of Billy Makin decided to introduce commercial fishing the writing was on the wall. It was only the die hard team match anglers who did not see it !! (I was one !).
We can debate all we like but match fishing is /will have changed completely by the end of this decade.
Of course people will still fish canals and river matches but as the average age is probably close to 50 at present, then the end of the decade is about right !!!!!
angling times
Posted: April 10th, 2011, 1:59 pm
Seems like a good debate, so I might aswell chuck my ten pence in !!!!!
First of all Nationals.
We now appear to have come full circle, from the All England to 5/6 divisions back to just 2 divisions, which will soon be back to one.
Why has this happened ? Well cost, venues, teams struggling for anglers and apathy.
While I and many others were happy to see preston put money back into fishing the form it went into was an own goal and in my opinion would speed up the demise of the competition.
If you win the national, that's it, no need to have teams fishing in a spin off like they did at Evesham.
Down the years teams like Bill's, Southport, Osset, Gordon League have all enjoyed going to the World Clubs, representing their country and giving most of the team a once in a life time opportunity.
The fish off will take this away and be dominated by the elite teams.
I think the money would have been better in the shape of a captain morgan cup style comp, an FA type where any team could have entered and had a home draw against if you like Starlets !!!
This might have helped to combine the different sector's in which match fishing finds itself.
AT winter League.
Again this has suffered the same way and just does not carry the prestige it once had and I am sure in time will be finished.
AT is a bit different as the leagues were formed by anglers in their own area and it is / was the anglers who picked the venues to fish. This in turn leads to arguments (like the old drennan super league) as to where to fish and eventually teams drop out due to the aggro that goes with it.
The semi-finals cause all sorts of problems in respect to travelling, venues etc.
The final has now been moved from the river to some lakes at Milton Keynes and I dont think that will help.
So how will things change in top flight team fishing in regard to Nationals and AT Winter Leagues ?
I think the answer is they will all fade away and match fishing will be predominately individual with a few team comps.
I think when the likes of Billy Makin decided to introduce commercial fishing the writing was on the wall. It was only the die hard team match anglers who did not see it !! (I was one !).
We can debate all we like but match fishing is /will have changed completely by the end of this decade.
Of course people will still fish canals and river matches but as the average age is probably close to 50 at present, then the end of the decade is about right !!!!!
Excellent post,and absolutely spot on imo.
angling times
Posted: April 10th, 2011, 2:27 pm
Yes, you are spot on there CWH, very well worded.
One thing I did notice in the WL I did last winter was a few youngsters fishing from Warrington. I did ask Craig Richie about it he said it was 'in the affordable bracket' for them.
Yes the World Inter Clubs. Without doubt the highlight of my 50 odd years in match fishing.
To compete against the worlds best with all your mates was priceless, you simply could not put a value on. we were fortunate enough to go to Sweden for a whole two weeks. Greatest time ever, we were sponsored up the hilt from loads of local businesses, it never cost us a great deal to be honest. I know it is more difficult nowadays to get sponsorship.
On the trip back (23 hours) I got heavily involved in a 'pontoon' school, I used to gamble a bit on the heavy side in those days, not so now. I came back with quite a bit more money than I went with!!! Happy Days certainly wouldn't swap it.
One thing I did notice in the WL I did last winter was a few youngsters fishing from Warrington. I did ask Craig Richie about it he said it was 'in the affordable bracket' for them.
Yes the World Inter Clubs. Without doubt the highlight of my 50 odd years in match fishing.
To compete against the worlds best with all your mates was priceless, you simply could not put a value on. we were fortunate enough to go to Sweden for a whole two weeks. Greatest time ever, we were sponsored up the hilt from loads of local businesses, it never cost us a great deal to be honest. I know it is more difficult nowadays to get sponsorship.
On the trip back (23 hours) I got heavily involved in a 'pontoon' school, I used to gamble a bit on the heavy side in those days, not so now. I came back with quite a bit more money than I went with!!! Happy Days certainly wouldn't swap it.
angling times
Posted: April 10th, 2011, 7:56 pm
Some great posts