Replacing tippets
Vince
wonder what triggers a tippet change. I mean if the leader is 9 feet long,
and every time you change the fly, you lose from 2 to 4 inches of tippet,
when do you realize it's time to add a tippet. Do you calculate the
remaining lenght of the leader, or does the fly really lands in such a way
that it is evident the tippet is too short? There is no visual sign to warn
you your leader is too short. I systematically add 18 inches of tippet for
every 4 flies tied.
George Adams
I add a tippet to the leader when I first use it. If I want a 9' 5X leader, I
use a 7.5' 4X and attatch an 18" 5X tippet. When the tippet gets short, I
simply add another. After a half dozen or so tippet changes, I'll add a foot or
so of 4X to make up for what's been lost, and tie the 5X to that.
George Adams
"All good fishermen stay young until they die, for fishing is the only dream of
youth that doth not grow stale with age."
---- J.W Muller
rw
I just kind of play it by ear. If the tippet looks too short, I replace
it. If the leader is getting too short, I add a couple of sections
(including tippet).
IMO, some fly anglers get way too obsessed with their leaders. The two
really important things, to me, are that the knots are tied well and
that there are no nicks or wind knots. Whether it's eight feet or ten
feet long, or whether the tippet is 12 inches or 20 inches long, are
relatively unimportant.
Larry Linthicum
I have a much broken rule that the first cast or two after a fly change are
NOT to a fish. I.e. I cast just to see how the leader/ fly combo works
together a few inches of tippet or a different size fly can make all the
difference in presentation
If my presentation appears as I desire, no change, if not I add/ shorten /
change size tippet
.... the last few feet of your "system" is more important than all the
rest combined, imho It matters not if you have a high tech rod made from
recycled space shuttles and a reel built to standards that make micro
surgery tools look crude, if your leader isn't doing it's job as instructed
( I speak mainly of dry fishing, that is what I do when I can possibly find
it, but I find a properly working leader greatly increases my catch in all
my fishing, while a poor one is a terrible obstacle )
Note: not being able to get a leader working as I desire, after some
additions and cutbacks ... sometimes brand new, is still the snafu I hit
more often than any other after all these years, but I'm getting far better
at "guessing" what change will help me put the fly where I want it with just
the right amount of slack .... days I'm lazy about this detail are days that
I tend to catch less ... not sure how much it's the laziness how much the
leader, but the two do go together
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Larry Linthicum
"rw" <royal...@earthlink.net> wrote
> IMO, some fly anglers get way too obsessed with their leaders. The two
> really important things, to me, are that the knots are tied well and
> that there are no nicks or wind knots. Whether it's eight feet or ten
> feet long, or whether the tippet is 12 inches or 20 inches long, are
> relatively unimportant.
>
LOL, I read yours after I posted my response
I think this is one of those "type of fishing and type of water" issues
I'll bet $0.28 that on Bonefish Flats fishing for a very educated big head,
you'd think differently than on "high gradient freestone streams" ...
pattern smatern, 9 times out of 10 the fish are "selective" to "no micro
drag"
I find that there is a range of tippet size/ tippet length / fly wind
resistence conbinations that work fine ( i.e. not just one combination ..
you can make a different length of 5X behave like 7X for example), or you
can "cast around" ( I cast slack I want more than build leaders to do it for
me, but the leader has to obey ) but just a few inches of tippet out of the
range or maybe a little bushier fly, and it can be nearly impossible to get
a tough fish fooling drift
Again, this will be much more important on the spring creeks that are my
true love ( nearly all I fish the last few years, counting meadow sreams as
the same type ) than more tumbly cricks .... here at home on the Sierra
freestones I almost never adjust much, just keep moving and casting to new
water. But when fishing to the same fish for long periods one WILL benefit
from serious leader study, and a tippet change is often far more important
than a pattern change ... IME
rw
>
> LOL, I read yours after I posted my response
>
> I think this is one of those "type of fishing and type of water" issues
>
> I'll bet $0.28 that on Bonefish Flats fishing for a very educated big head,
> you'd think differently than on "high gradient freestone streams" ...
> pattern smatern, 9 times out of 10 the fish are "selective" to "no micro
> drag"
Obviously, Larry, I'll adjust my leader to the type of water I'm
fishing. I'm not a total novice, and, believe it or not, I fish spring
creeks, too.
Tim J.
"George Adams" <georg...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20030828223656...@mb-m22.aol.com...
> >From: "Vince"
>
> I add a tippet to the leader when I first use it. If I want a 9' 5X leader, I
> use a 7.5' 4X and attatch an 18" 5X tippet. When the tippet gets short, I
> simply add another. After a half dozen or so tippet changes, I'll add a foot
or
> so of 4X to make up for what's been lost, and tie the 5X to that.
I do the same, except I skip a size and go 3X to 5X (or 4X to 6X, etc.) This
year I decided to learn to tie my own leaders and have been happier with the
results vs. a tapered leader. It just seems to turn over better. Of course, I'm
learning how to cast better, so that just might have something to do with it.
:)
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj
Larry Linthicum
"rw" <royal...@earthlink.net> wrote
. I'm not a total novice, and, believe it or not, I fish spring
> creeks, too.
>
I know that, of course.
But found it amusing that we seemed to be giving
nearly opposite opinions on the importance of leader tweaking.
Figured I'd point out some reasons such difference of opinion can exist and
both be
correct, for those less experienced than yourself.
I "speak" here, exactly as when teaching a group of my clients to work dogs.
That is, I talk loud enough, although apparently to "Joe," for all to
hear, so all can potentially benefit. Unless I feel "Joe's" situation is
unique and private ... then I take him aside and whisper. There are shades
of gray, of course, but mostly they exist in the listeners not in myself.
I've had clients get pissed for "being picked on in front of everyone" but
99% instinctively understand my methods and motives.
On any media read by many people I speak to the many, even when using the
convenience of words like
"you." In the past, around this particular forum, if I wished to reply
to a single person, I'd do so privately, now I just pass.
The purpose of my "LOL" post was to help Vince see why two such contrary
opinions might exist.
The purpose of this one is to try and clarify parts my approach to posting
on public forums. I make errors and exceptions, but I try hard to avoid
"personal" posts. Imho, "personal" is the biggest limiter to the potential
of these Internet places. Except in highly technical/ professional topic
areas the potential of Usenet is largely wasted, lost to the "personal," and
that is too bad, imho.
Neither post was directed solely AT "rw" although his comments inspired
both, and words like "you" are used for convenience and a more relaxed
style. They are directed AT everyone that might read them.
Tim J.
"Larry Linthicum" wrote...
<snip>
> The purpose of this one is to try and clarify parts my approach to posting
> on public forums. I make errors and exceptions, but I try hard to avoid
> "personal" posts. Imho, "personal" is the biggest limiter to the potential
> of these Internet places.
The exception, of course, being an opinion or personal experience regarding
Simms waders. ;-)
Larry Linthicum
a clear difference between my use of "personal" to suggest I try to avoid
private matters, i.e. "personal differences" on the forum, and a use of the
word as in "personal opinions" Those later are the potential value, the
former the flames and stumbles of public forums, it seems to me
.......................................
......................................
So, Tim ( yes, Tim personally <G> nobody else need read )
I hinted at, but didn't get specific about, the Simms thing for the simple
reason that
I figured it would cause unproductive comments.
When I looked at my wader post, before sending it, it seemed clear to me,
that it would generate a ton of "why the hell buy 3 cheapies instead of
Simms" posts ... I tried ( apparently unsuccessfully ) to avoid "going
there" by saying "I ain't going there" in advance.
For that record, my reasons are my reasons and have nothing to do with
product quality .... I believe Simms has state of the art products
I tried to buy Patagonia, another top end brand, but none of the stock sizes
fit me well enough to satisfy me ... so that information should eliminate
the "price issue" from my reasons
I ( to my mind ) all but suggested ( yes this is still aimed at Tim and only
Tim <G>) that you
contact me privately if your curiosity was getting to you, with my " on this
forum" qualifier. I started to just mail you the reason privately but
your mangled e-mail address and the general attitudes around here against
privately discussing private matters, stopped me
End of private reply on a public forum, an example of one of my exceptions
to my general rules <G>
....................................
....................................
end of post
Tim J.
"Larry Linthicum" wrote...
> I must have the worst writing skills on earth. It seems to me that there is
> a clear difference between my use of "personal" to suggest I try to avoid
> private matters, i.e. "personal differences" on the forum, and a use of the
> word as in "personal opinions"
No, that was clear to me.
> Those later are the potential value, the
> former the flames and stumbles of public forums, it seems to me
> .......................................
> ......................................
>
> So, Tim ( yes, Tim personally <G> nobody else need read )
:)
> I hinted at, but didn't get specific about, the Simms thing for the simple
> reason that
> I figured it would cause unproductive comments.
>
> When I looked at my wader post, before sending it, it seemed clear to me,
> that it would generate a ton of "why the hell buy 3 cheapies instead of
> Simms" posts ... I tried ( apparently unsuccessfully ) to avoid "going
> there" by saying "I ain't going there" in advance.
>
> For that record, my reasons are my reasons and have nothing to do with
> product quality .... I believe Simms has state of the art products
>
> I tried to buy Patagonia, another top end brand, but none of the stock sizes
> fit me well enough to satisfy me ... so that information should eliminate
> the "price issue" from my reasons
>
> I ( to my mind ) all but suggested ( yes this is still aimed at Tim and only
> Tim <G>) that you
> contact me privately if your curiosity was getting to you, with my " on this
> forum" qualifier. I started to just mail you the reason privately but
> your mangled e-mail address
I've posted several messages on this board in the past week with my email addy:
kpos3wt at comcast dot net. But do you think your reasons for not buying a
certain brand might be of interest to the group? If so, post 'em and let the
chips fall where they may. Many would agree <G>.
> and the general attitudes around here against
> privately discussing private matters, stopped me
Hmmm. . . I've never experienced this attitude. There are many things that
*should* be taken to a private venue, and I've not had anyone else I've emailed
complain about this.
> End of private reply on a public forum, an example of one of my exceptions
> to my general rules <G>
Again, :)
rw
> "rw" <royal...@earthlink.net> wrote
>
> . I'm not a total novice, and, believe it or not, I fish spring
>
>>creeks, too.
>>
>
>
> I know that, of course.
>
> But found it amusing that we seemed to be giving
> nearly opposite opinions on the importance of leader tweaking.
Sorry, Larry. I couldn't help myself from taking it personally. I knew
it was wrong, but I couldn't help it. :-)
I used to be really into the technical aspects of flyfishing -- things
that I picked up from "book learning" -- including having a leader that
"turned over" perfectly. The more I've fished (and I've fished an awful
lot in the past few years), the more I've gotten away from it.
Now my attitude toward flyfishing has become like the classic phrase of
homebrewers when confronted with challenging technical questions:
"Relax! Have a homebrew." I translate that into: "Relax! Tie on more
tippet." :-)
George Adams
>This
>year I decided to learn to tie my own leaders and have been happier with the
>results vs. a tapered leader. It just seems to turn over better. Of course,
>I'm
>learning how to cast better, so that just might have something to do with it.
Because of a general dissatisfaction with tapered leaders that were readily
available at the time, I tied my own for years. A few years ago, I heard high
praise from a number of people regarding Climax leaders, so I gave them a try
and find they suit my tackle and casting style,(or lack thereof), just fine, so
I have been using them since. In all honesty, I pretty much agree with RW's
comments on leaders and some other aspects of fly fishing. It's real easy to
make things complicated, when in reality it ain't rocket science.
Larry Linthicum
"rw" <royal...@earthlink.net> wrote
>
> Now my attitude toward flyfishing has become like the classic phrase of
> homebrewers when confronted with challenging technical questions:
> "Relax! Have a homebrew." I translate that into: "Relax! Tie on more
> tippet." :-)
>
Well I overstated my anal fixation with leaders to a degree .... and I'm
certain that many of the ROFFians, rw included, have far more fishing
experience than myself. But one thing I have noticed in my fishing is a
tendency towards too long of tippets .... I bet I remove some as often as
add some .. right after that first test cast.
So a common progression sees me change flies a few times, add too much
tippet, remove some, be happy for a few changes, add too much etc etc
I doubt I can put it into words but there is a "look" to too much, as I cast
it, anyway. Here's a try .... if you see/ sense drag but most of the line
and leader seems to be floating well ( all the problem seems at the very end
of the system) it's ( for me) likely too much or too
fine a tippet. If you see/ sense drag and can see that most of the leader
or the line was floating wrong first, it's likely too little or too thick a
tippet.
A least, that's my perception ..... I'd guess that this is like many fishing
issues ... confidence in one's own approach is the real key.
John Kowalski
difference in tippet size at any knot greater than 2X. Therefore when I am
fishing with a 5X leader, I add tippet when enough of the leader has been
removed so that the tip is 3X.
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.510 / Virus Database: 307 - Release Date: 8/14/2003
John Kowalski
of false strikes. That might indicate that whatever size the tippet is, it
is too large!
"John Kowalski" <bmk...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:vkvm7kh...@corp.supernews.com...
Wayne P
wayne
"John Kowalski" <bmk...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:vl06pgr...@corp.supernews.com...
daytripper
wrote:
>Why would false strikes be caused by too large of tippet???
The fish sees the tippet at the last instant, perhaps?
Or, because the tippet was not supple enough, the fish sees the fly dragging?
/daytripper (maybe you should just ask the fish? ;-)
John Kowalski
will not scare off the fish. If you see fish rolling over your fly, he has
seen something at the last second to cause him to veer off. It may be the
tippet, it may be something else. Fluorocarbon if submerged is much harder
for the fly to see because its index of refraction is very close to water so
you can use larger fluro than nylon. It cost about 3 times as much and has
some environmental concerns
"daytripper" <day_t...@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2u71lv0ad8uuv6sng...@4ax.com...
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.510 / Virus Database: 307 - Release Date: 8/15/2003