Then – what are the optimal “turntables” (models and sizes) for hunting rudd?
Of the serial models, in my experience, the best for rudd is Mepps Comet, as well as DAM Effzett, which is as close to it as possible. On “turntables” with a “long”-shaped petal, rudd is caught worse on average, although there are exceptions in some bodies of water. The size of the spinner depends primarily on the size of the fish, and secondly on its aggressiveness at a given time. At competitions near Krasnodar, most often there is a rudd weighing about 100 g, the “Comet” of the first number is best suited for it. If the average weight is twice as much – the second. Purposefully catching on the third number is only a large rudd – from four hundred grams. At competitions, it is more often necessary to deviate from the standard in the other direction – to put a zero when there is a rudd of a frankly “sports” size. During those periods when the rudd is most active (more often in spring and early autumn), it often attacks a larger spoon. At the same time, the number of bites is large, but it is possible to catch relatively few fish.
If standard lures are not ideal for catching rudd, in which direction should they be modified?
The main variant of the revision just concerns these very cases – when a small rudd tries to eat a “spinner” that is too big for its mouth. The fishing efficiency increases by one and a half to two times if you change the standard tee to a smaller one. And in a normal situation (with an average activity of the rudd), a smaller tee is preferable to the standard one. Therefore, for some time now, when I have to catch rudd, I have to remount several turntables that I plan to use.
Here it is worth mentioning one subtlety. If you just put a proportionally smaller one instead of a standard tee, it will turn out that the stings of its hooks will be too close to the rotating petal, which will not have the best effect on the effectiveness of the bites. Therefore, either the tee should be taken with a relatively long forend, or the issue should be solved by means of a slightly elongated wire frame. Finally, it makes sense to replace the tee with a single hook on separate “turntables”. This is primarily justified where you have to fish directly in the grass. Such a spinner clings to it much less often, but the rudd sits on a single stand almost as well as on a tee.
Does it make sense to try to catch a rudd with a wobble?
The meaning is, in my opinion, only if it goes from three hundred grams and above. Smaller – also really catching with wobblers, but it will be on the verge of perversion. In fact, why try to catch fish with a micro-plug weighing one and a half to two grams, if it is no worse caught with other types of bait, which are twice as heavy, three times farther are thrown and four times less likely to cling to algae? If, after all, a wobbler, then of all their types in this case, two are appropriate. These are rather thick “cranks” with small and medium depth, and especially rattlin, the size in both cases is 3-4 cm.
If not a “spinner” and not a wobble, then – what?
“Rubber” and spinnerbait. Even, perhaps, the priority here is the opposite: this “turntable” can be considered as an alternative to “rubber” and spinnerbait. By “rubber” I mean either an ordinary small (2-3 g) jig head with a twister, or a rig, where the bait is set on a simple single hook, and a shot is fixed on the line twenty centimeters in front of it. As for the spinnerbait, I have not yet seen the ready-made one that would suit us in catching rudd, so I have to do it myself. What we need is a weight of about 3 g, a single petal size is even slightly smaller than on “00” lures, a “skirt” is not required, you can get by with a small twister.
In a magazine article about “edible rubber” it was said that rudd is partial to some varieties of such new baits for us. Can we expect that the number of bites when switching from a conventional jig-head twister to an edible one will increase several times?
The number of bites when switching to “edible rubber” really increases, but the main thing is that their quality improves, that is, the rudd, having taken such a bait in its mouth, is in no hurry to get rid of it. It is important that the jig head is as light as possible. It is even better to use a rig with a simple hook and shot in front. Well, the brand of “edible rubber” is far from the last meaning.
If you catch rudd with an almost weightless bait, is it worth using a bombard?
The bombard is probably overkill. The required throw distance when catching rudd usually does not exceed 20 m, but on average we catch from a distance of 8-10 m. So if the bombard, then the smallest one is slowly sinking, with a dry weight of 3-4 g. the assortment includes such miniature bombards. As an alternative, I can suggest the following option. You take a sinking minnow wobbler with a length of 4-5 cm, remove the tees from it, tie it back to front, and from the back – tie a 30-centimeter leash made of monofilament fishing line with “rubber” on a single line. Works no worse than the bombard option. Perhaps even better.
author: Konstantin Kuzmin
250 questions about spinning. Directory