You might be thinking "duh" about forward-facing sonar (FFS) playing big in wins and high finishes but hear me out – 2 things have been overlapping in my head:
1. All the rookie wins – 4 out of 8 tourneys on the Elites, and a win + AOY on the Bass Pro Tour – plus the success of guys like Jacob Wheeler and Dustin Connell who seemed to figure out forward-facing sonar (FFS) and multiple brands of electronics first.
2. Kevin VanDam retiring and whether he truly is "the best ever" when we see winning and top 10 percentages (and rookie performance) eclipsing his.
So I'm thinking – is the stuff in #2 happening because of #1? Or is it something else, like maybe all the free YouTube education Kevin and guys his age never had coming up?
I can't know for sure, but my 2c is that it's literally nuts to think that someone can be "better" statistically than Kevin in a shorter amount of time than he did it, even though in some ways that appears to be happening.
I'm not saying we don't have great fishermen now who maybe will eventually be acknowledged as "better" than Kevin. What I'm saying is, what if 6 to 10 guys already are stacking up better stats than Kevin? How could that happen?
Is it FFS? Is it FFS enabling guys to fish for less-pressured "dumber" fish? Is it FFS enabling more efficient use of "easier to eat" finesse baits? Is it all that plus guys building on the foundation Kevin and other guys built and taught? Or is it something else?
Like I said, I don't know – but it appears to be happening...which of course takes nothing away from Kevin being the Terminator....
For a little perspective I asked the one 'n only donnie barone for his 2c. If you don't know, don was a big-time, long-time ESPN sports reporter before getting hoodwinked into writing about bassin' 😁. Here's his 2c which I think is good stuff:
> Sports are a timeline thing, you have to compare apples to apples. KVD's era is over – you have to judge him in the era he played with the tools he used.
> Who is the better NFL running back, Jim Brown or Derrick Henry. You can't compare completely different era.
> So when you ask is it possible that guys can have a better winning percentage than KVD, the simple answer is, Yes, no doubt. But the math is flawed.
> Lots of anglers will have a better percentage because they have better stuff. In his time, with the equipment of his time, KVD was righteous and none of his peers topped him.
> Many sportswriters make the improbable statements like "the best of all time." That statement is only true when all of time runs out.
> ...the new guys will have better win percentages because they have better stuff and will continue to have better stuff for their entire career, stuff KVD never laid hands on. But in his time with the equipment of his time, he'd kick their a**. It's never just about the gizmos.
> If I was to write a story about Kevin I would say simply, "In his time he was the best." That's the only really true sentence anyone could/should write.
|