(Editor's note: Michael Murphy competed on the FLW Tour as a pro for 6 seasons and fished both the Southern and Northern divisions of the Bassmaster Opens this year. He recently submitted this opinion piece to BassFan regarding B.A.S.S.' decision to ban tunnel-hull boats from the Opens in 2018).
I typically let comments sit when it comes to articles and feedback, but when I read about the ruling from B.A.S.S. about tunnel hulls, and some of the feedbacks I have seen, I believe the majority have sat silent on this – particularly the ones who are for the rule. I am personally for the rule. Here's why:
First question: Why did they make a ruling for jet drives originally?
Second question: What is the true difference between the functionality of a jet drive and a tunnel hull?
Third question: Is it healthy for the sport when participation drops off in trails and organizations, when the specific reason for the citing is due to tunnel hull participation?
Fourth question: Do the majority of anglers believe the participation in these tournaments, specifically fall transition and river tournaments, would stay strong over time if this trend continued?
Then comes the educated business decision from B.A.S.S. that I both respect and am all for making.
Let me address these questions that are both voiced by myself and the silent majority. Before doing that, let me first point out that many of the ones in rebuttal when looking up profiles, have been in direct benefit of running a tunnel hull (obviously a biased opinion) or did not compete in these tournaments where this type of boat is in question (cue feathers ruffled). Let's move on ...
Question 1: Jet drives were originally banned for a combination of things. Tiller control (i.e. hand-control steering) is one of them. Another reason was stockpiling. An angler would catch fish elsewhere and then drop them in a place only he could have access to them. But more importantly because there was a trend that when tournament organizations would go to a body of water that was either a river or in the fall during drawdown. Without participation, tournament organizations were either forced to go to different venues or ban them. It came to a point to keep this sport as affordable as possible (this could go onto another tangent I will not address here), and people having to now own two boats to be competitive, with participation dropping and the logistical nightmare of trying to find locations this situation would be more accommodating to the majority. It was much easier to just rule against jet drives.
Question 2: What is the true difference between a jet drive and a tunnel hull? Nothing. It is a loophole that has been exploited. Instead of the pickup in the lower unit, now it is in the boat. Instead of an impeller, it is now a propeller. Functionally, it is a creative way to skate in the gray. I applaud the creativity. I applaud those anglers like Ott DeFoe for being the professional to find that angle and capitalize on it, when no one else did. Ott is not a cheater. Ott is the definition of true professionalism to know the rules inside and out and capitalize on them to the maximum. Anyone in opposition of Ott is out of bounds. It is how the game is played, and it is also how and why the game grows and matures. We could go back in time and watch how specific winning streaks came to an end because of rule changes. They defined greatness, but also defined maturity in the sport with ever-changing techniques. This can be compared to the "Hemi" and Richard Petty's awesome run of wins for all of you NASCAR fans. It both defines greatness and maturity of the sport.
Question 3: Is it healthy when participation drops ... or any reason? No. When drop of participation continues to happen, that is not good for the stability of the organization or those in an AOY points race. When you see participation drop off, especially toward the end of the year, it's either because they are out of the points race or they don't like the venue. It happens. Anglers tuck tail, go home and take up golf or get ready to hunt (more feathers ruffled). News flash – time on the water and time in tournaments, especially tough ones, is how you get better as an angler. However, this participation drop-off can be tracked over time at a specific rate. When that rate is greater than normal and tunnel hulls are specifically stated, well, the organization now has to make a decision that is both business-related and to keep the majority wanting to come back. I completely understand that and respect it. There are times that I have been on both the good and bad side of that equation.
Question 4: Do the majority of anglers believe the participation of these tournaments, specifically fall transition and river tournaments, would stay strong over time if this trend continued? That answer is no. Actions speak louder than words, and there are many people who tend to favor silent protest with well-written emails in a polite way to tournament directors of the organizations. I have found you can attract many more bees with honey than you can with vinegar.
Point is, before stepping to the edge of the emotional cliff on rulings that tournament organizations make, I think it is important to try to understand, within their business structure, why the decision was made. For the most part, it is usually taken from a response of feedback that is above the norm from the majority of the anglers. Nobody's perfect, nor is either major organization, but they are still great-run organizations that are willing to listen to constructive feedback. I applaud that and both organizations' continued growth over time. These are rarely snap decisions and, on the contrary, usually well overdue.
