Something anecdotal has to do with anecdotes — little stories. Anecdotal evidence is based on hearsay rather than hard facts.
People like to share stories about things that happened to them, or that they heard about, to make a point. That kind of talk is anecdotal: based on small, personal accounts. Anecdotal stories are helpful when you’re trying to give an example of something, but there's a downside to anecdotal information: since it’s not based on facts, you never know if you can totally trust it. So it's best to go beyond the anecdotal and get more solid information.
Unfortunately, most fishermen never bother to get what scientists call "Statistically Significant" amounts of data. All the good fishermen I know have good pattern recognition skills, but with too little solid information, many of them jump quickly to what turns out to be wrong conclusions.
To me, the worst of all are a few lure makers and sales people, who all too frequently skirtthe truth in order to try to increase their sales.
Lately, there has been a lot of garbage written about pressure waves and their effect on lure patterns and ideal positions in the ”SPREAD,” with special needs for lures of a given shape and/or color.
It is painfully obvious that one particular lure maker who discusses “Pressure Waves” over and over knows little or no physics. This lure maker has never bothered to investigate or find out the differences between a surface wave and a pressure wave. Their latest marketing program is based on scientific sounding jargon but incorrect information. At one time, this same lure maker had claimed a 90% hook up ratio; which any reasonably knowledgeable angler or crew would know is total baloney. No one can maintain a 90% hook up ratio for any decent length of time.
When I saw this lure maker on the dock in Cairns and asked him “What do you count as a hookup?” He replied, “If the line fell out of the outrigger and the spool turned over at all it was obviously hooked!” He never told me his bite to catch ratio and I did not bother to ask.
Unfortunately, some folks must be falling for his pseudo scientific malarky.
I am most disturbed that a conservation oriented group that I support has published an article by this clown! I have written the organization with respect to my misgivings.