Which would give you more pleasure…equal pleasure…or less pleasure?
Catching a smaller fish on an appropriately lighter rod…or catching a larger fish on a heavier rod?
No Brainer, Big fish = Big fun!
THAT is a hard question for us!
On one trip to Loreto, the MOST memorable fish of the trip was a Ballyhoo taken on a 3wt with a #10 shad fly. THAT fish took more thinking and pestering than any of the dorado, sails, small roosters (on the 3wt also), or any of the “rock fish” we pestered that trip.
For us a LOT depends on how you have to approach the target. We would MUCH rather pester BG’s on top than the biggest LM’s sub-surface.
Good question…no wrong answer. 
…lee s.
I normally outfit myself with equipment that supports what I expect to catch. But to answer the question, heavier rod and bigger fish is kewl 
Mark
Hey Lee… How big is a Ballyhoo?
I’ll take a pretty fish over a big fish any day, really makes no difference to me what weight rod I catch them on. That being said, I AM planning on going for some steelhead here in the near future, so I may change my mind (though I’m really quite fond of those pretty little cutts, and I don’t see that ever changing for me).
Regards,
Joe Martin
Too complicated for me.
Catch a fish=great pleasure.
Don’t need to add any more variables.
Good Luck!
Buddy
To answer your question with a question. When you catch a lot of fish do you brag about the biggest or the smallest.
The biggest of course.
With few exceptions, most of the time the bigger fish are more of a challenge.
I enjoy catching bigger fish to catching little ones. I don’t think I like any of the reasons I can think of why I do though. Somehow it makes me feel better about myself to catch bigger ones, and I do not like that, but it is true. Catching a ‘difficult’ fish can be rewarding. Tricky cast, long, special type. Catching a big fish that is ‘too easy’ holds no pleasure at all. Like big-dumb-sluggish-stupidones.
I like all fish the same my favorite fish this season was a little 14 incher, that fish was a challenge. I also think rainbows under 20 inches are funner to fight because they are fiesty, and like getting airborn.
Oh what about the option of light rod big fish. my biggest rainbow was about 27inches I caught him on my 7 wt later that day I got out my 5wt and caught a 25 inch fish, the later was more fun-rewarding
fish4trout,
Ballyhoo are often used for bait. The ones we pestered were about 8". The “beak”, being only a bottom half, would tend to flip the fly harmlessly up, over, and away from the fish when they hit.:roll:
Thanks Lee, I was thinking of somthing else…
Big vs small… I love to catch big fish but I would rather catch 12" fish all than fish all day for just one big one.
Much of the thrill for me is catching the fish on
a rod that thats appropriately sized. Whether it
is a 10 inch bluegill on a 2 weight or a 5 pound
largemouth on the 6 weight, it’s all good.G Warm
regards, Jim
Big or small? I’d probably say big but some of the best fish were when I was in the zone, perfect fly, perfect cast, sightcasting to 14inch rainbows. Explosive dryfly action, and it just seemed like it was a dream, nothing else mattered it was just fishing pure and simple and everything was like clockwork.
-Hillard
I absolutely agree with JC
Martin
I absolutely agree with JC
Martin[/quote]
I absolutely agree with JC
Martin[/quote]
Me too…
Not too long ago I caught a 15# rainbow…in stillwater…and indeed it was…"Like big-dumb-sluggish-stupidones. "
But having said that…it’s still the big ones…not long ago went to big…really big… woolly buggers just to keep the 12" to 15" rainbows off 
…the count went down but…
Duck…Good question actually. It goes both ways, depending on what’s available to me but when things get tough on our spring creeks, I’ve had some fine sport catching smallish fish, maybe 10-12" on my 1wt!
I have! Especially topside…
I don’t live in an area known for large fish so my fav. road of choice if not bamboo is usually a 2, maybe 3wt.
Jeremy.
I remember the 13" brown in Montana more vividly than some pretty good sized steelhead (12 lbs.) I’ve caught. The Montana brown on a 3 wt. sight casting to the almost imperceptible rises just under the overhanging blades of lush grass that barely touched the stream. 12 well spaced casts, the final one that worked, with the fly just brushing the outer blade of deep green grass. To answer though, gear matched to fish and smaller but difficult interest me more than huge and easy. Though sight casting to large difficult fish has caught my interest also of late. I’ve come to realize going ‘under gunned’ isn’t a good idea from a couple of perspectives.
Cheers,
MontanaMoose
Agree with Jeremy, Although I have caught my share of monsters, there are times I like to go to those mountain lakes and fish for the 2" ers (and sometimes that is more of a challenge). Take a 2 wt or smaller or even bamboo or glass, it is in itself a rush.
The fact that fish do not get very big in these high mountain lakes, I have Browns, Grayling, Brookies and some Tiger Trout, and on the right rod put up a heck of a fight. And can we talk the colors these high mountain fish have!
As far as (quote:Not too long ago I caught a 15# rainbow…in stillwater…and indeed it was…“Like big-dumb-sluggish-stupidones. " )
I will not even attemp to stereo type big fish. The 34” was not slugish at all, nor are those Steelies. I think the mood of the fish is water temp.