Fish stories put to test -- with polygraphs

LAKEPORT, Calif. -- Paul Gibson, an amateur fisherman, reeled in a whopper: a 10-pound largemouth bass that was the talk of the competition. But in a sport accustomed to fish tales of storied proportions, even seeing wasn't necessarily believing.

So out came the polygraph equipment, and for the next hour, Gibson was quizzed on every detail of his prized catch. ''I've got nothing to hide," he said.

In big-money sports, where contest judges can't always keep their eyes on competitors, lie-detector tests -- now routinely used to catch crooks and snag lying spouses -- have become commonplace at some sporting events to expose cheats trying to wiggle around the rules.

Many fishing derbies now require winners to submit to polygraph exams. Some bodybuilding tournaments, unconvinced that conventional drug testing is reliable, are increasingly relying on polygraphs to ensure drug-free competitions. In golf, those claiming prizes for holes-in-one must sometimes submit to electronic testing to be sure bad lies stay on the course, not on scorecards.

''Sometimes, stories don't check out. We certainly don't do it for grins. We only do it when something doesn't sit right," said Brad Janney, claims manager for the Dallas-based National Hole-In-One Association, an insurance company that underwrites hundreds of golf tournaments.

The association has distributed about $2 million in cash prizes, most in increments of about $10,000. The vast majority of those asked to take lie-detector tests pass without a problem.

''We just want to verify the legitimacy of their claims," Janney said.

''Everyone who's in search of glory has to be held accountable. The honor system doesn't always seem to work, and it's unfortunate," said Steve Downs, chairman of the World Natural Bodybuilding Federation, which requires all contestants to prequalify for its competitions by taking a polygraph.

Conventional blood and urine tests usually indicate only recent drug use -- and their reliability for detecting certain substances is sometimes debatable, Downs said. What's more, his federation requires competitors to be clean of some banned substances for up to seven years. A polygraph exam, he said, is often the only way to determine long-term compliance.

Gibson passed the polygraph without a snag. And he and his fishing partner, Wayne Cheney, netted the top prize -- a certificate for a $25,000 boat and nearly $5,000 in cash. Gibson caught the biggest of the duo's combined catch, reeled in during the one-day tourney held Oct. 23 in Lakeport, about 80 miles north of San Francisco.

''If it takes a polygraph to get the dough, then that's what it takes," said Gibson, a 30-year-old engineering technician from Chico, Calif.

''Unfortunately, fishing has its share of cheaters. It's hard enough to go out and catch a trophy-sized fish when the playing field's level."

In competition, fishermen must follow exacting rules covering the use of live bait, casting techniques, and how they can hook a fish.

''Things get very competitive," said Craig Sutherland, editor of American Bass Fishing News and a member of the national board of American Bass, one of the country's largest fishing organizations, which sponsored the derby won by Gibson's team.

''There's a tremendous amount of camaraderie, so it's sometimes hard to imagine that anybody would cheat. The larger the prize, the larger the risk, the larger the potential for cheating.

''You know the old joke: You can tell a fisherman is lying because his lips are moving."

Polygraphs ''help protect the integrity of our sport, the integrity of our sponsors, and our organization," Sutherland said.

Greed is a powerful temptation. ''When you've got a $20,000 prize on the line, people will do anything to get it," said Ted Todd, a polygraph examiner based outside San Francisco who has worked extensively with law enforcement.

''There's a lot of backbiting going on among the fishermen. In many cases, all of that stopped when they started using the polygraph."

For years, he was on standby at the annual fishing festival in Rio Vista, Calif., a small town downriver from Sacramento. But three years ago, organizers began making winners take lie-detector tests. That year, the apparent winner was disqualified after Todd detected inconsistencies in his story of when he caught the fish.

''People have been known to catch a huge fish a week before a competition and keep it alive," Todd said.

The man lost his claim to the festival's prize, a boat, but reached a settlement with contest organizers after pursuing legal action.

Jim Adams, the polygraph examiner who administered the test to Gibson, says lie detection helps keep fishermen honest.

Armed with a laptop, arm straps, and a list of questions, Adams tried to keep Gibson at ease. ''This isn't an interrogation," Adams said. ''If everybody's nervous, nobody would pass the test. Everybody knows coming in that they'll have to take the test."

Those who fail tests have never been known to be prosecuted, although cheating in big-money contests amounts to fraud, said Janney, from the hole-in-one association. Contest sponsors would rather avoid negative publicity.

''It's rarely punished," if ever, Janney said. ''All they get is a wagging finger."