I can cast!!!
Michael Eraña
the line with out it piling up at the end... The magic number is ....
(Drum roll here...)
64 feet 4.5 inches!
Is that good? I dunno. I do know that this is a cast that requires a lot
of body to throw. I use the entrie arm and have to make sure the rod is
loaded really good!
This cast was done with 5wt line (Cortland I think, I got it from Wal-
Mart) on a 4-5wt Browning Rod.
Moderate on and off winds. Made 5 - 6 casts in succession with atleast
30-40 ft of line out then lifted the line and cast.
I can sure feel the strain on the rod when I did this... Also this cast
was on grass. I am sure the lift would have been much more difficult had
I been on water...
Now if I can just get the roll cast more consistent!
--
Michael Eraña
Sr. Systems Architecht/Analyst
http://erana.tsx.org - Family Site
http://merana67.tripod.com - Fishing Site
daytripper
wrote:
>Heck, I finally remembered to measure how far I can consistently thrown
>the line with out it piling up at the end... The magic number is ....
>(Drum roll here...)
>
>64 feet 4.5 inches!
>
>Is that good? I dunno. I do know that this is a cast that requires a lot
>of body to throw. I use the entrie arm and have to make sure the rod is
>loaded really good!
That's more than respectable distance for a 4-5 weight, Michael - particularly
on grass.
>This cast was done with 5wt line (Cortland I think, I got it from Wal-
>Mart) on a 4-5wt Browning Rod. Moderate on and off winds. Made
>5 - 6 casts in succession with at least 30-40 ft of line out then
>lifted the line and cast.
>
>I can sure feel the strain on the rod when I did this... Also this cast
>was on grass. I am sure the lift would have been much more difficult had
>I been on water...
Actually, it should be easier to pick the line up from water than grass.
>Now if I can just get the roll cast more consistent!
Now there's something that really doesn't work on grass at all!
btw: make sure you examine the line/leader interface after thrashing around on
the lawn. This connection takes a beating when casting off a hard surface.
/daytripper
asadi
In a prior thread, it was spoken that a rod was rated at casting thirty feet
of line and to consistently cast very much farther was, inessense
overloading the rod. Stress/crack/break possibilities ensue.
If I remember correctly, someone said that the 'distance casts' were
performed by shooting the line...all well and good. Myself, I doubt if I
shoot more than ten or fifeteen feet....never really practiced, might get it
up to twenty if I sworked on it. Is that average or is there a technique I
need to brush up on?................
daytripper wrote in message <498o5s0teueigqb27...@4ax.com>...
Ernie Harrison
There are several factors that enter into distance casting such as type
of line, weight of line, diameter of line and the slickness of the line.
The single haul and double haul add line speed and shooting adds distance.
If you are going for distance and don't care about presentation get a
shooting head. If presentation at about thirty feet and roll casting is
important get a double taper line. If longer distances are requited with
good presentation get a weight foreword line. Start by learning to cast
good tight loops without shocking the line, then learn the single haul.
When you have that down advance to the double haul. You can practice
shooting line any time at the end of the foreword cast.
Ernie Harrison.
asadi wrote in message <#2WvNEcS$GA.259@cpmsnbbsa05>...
michael roegner
casters with respect to distance. You may go 10 years between
opportunities to actually fish at that distance, but its always nice
to know you can do it if you have to. And if you can do 60' with a 5
weight, you can probably do 80+ with an 8 or 9 wt. saltwater rod.
A curiosity question - Given that you can get out there 60' when
going for distance, how far can you get with accuracy? Take a dinner
plate or frisbee and set it on the grass. Back off 20 feet or so and
see how often you can land a fly in the plate. If you can hit 80%,
back off another 10 feet and try again. If you can get out to 40
feet and still consistently hit the plate then you're set for 99% of
the fishing you'll ever do in fresh water. From there, you can try
varying the conditions a bit - stand with trees in the backcast area,
put a garbage can in front of the plate, etc. This kind of practice
will really pay off next time you're on the river.
Michael
On Sat, 18 Dec 1999 22:24:26 GMT, merana67...@hotmail.com
(Michael Eraña) wrote:
>Heck, I finally remembered to measure how far I can consistently thrown
>the line with out it piling up at the end... The magic number is ....
>(Drum roll here...)
>
>64 feet 4.5 inches!
>
>Is that good? I dunno. I do know that this is a cast that requires a lot
>of body to throw. I use the entrie arm and have to make sure the rod is
>loaded really good!
>
>This cast was done with 5wt line (Cortland I think, I got it from Wal-
>Mart) on a 4-5wt Browning Rod.
>
>Moderate on and off winds. Made 5 - 6 casts in succession with atleast
>30-40 ft of line out then lifted the line and cast.
>
>I can sure feel the strain on the rod when I did this... Also this cast
>was on grass. I am sure the lift would have been much more difficult had
>I been on water...
>
michael roegner
where I could cast an entire line - a few weeks later I went to a show
where I watched an older gentleman (I think it was Lee Wulff) out on
the lawn "casting" a full line with his bare hands. Talk about
bursting one's bubble - here I'd thought I was hot stuff, and this guy
was outdoing me without even breaking a sweat. I guess my
disappointment showed in my face, because he stopped for a while and
set down to talk to me. He told me it was really just a stunt, and
that anyone could learn to do it. He also told me that I needed to
focus my attention on casting ACCURATELY, under difficult conditions,
rather than "wasting" my time on distance. I've never forgotten it.
jluebeck
the hole. Sounds like you have found a new use for it. "You are 25' 7"
from the rise. I suggest a 5 wt. fwd. with your cast angled 30 degrees to
the wind."
Joe
--
> From: merana67...@hotmail.com (Michael Eraña)
> Organization: Philadelphia Shipyard
> Newsgroups: rec.outdoors.fishing.fly
> Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 22:24:26 GMT
> Subject: I can cast!!!
>
> Heck, I finally remembered to measure how far I can consistently thrown
> the line with out it piling up at the end... The magic number is ....
> (Drum roll here...)
>
> 64 feet 4.5 inches!
>
> Is that good? I dunno. I do know that this is a cast that requires a lot
> of body to throw. I use the entrie arm and have to make sure the rod is
> loaded really good!
>
> This cast was done with 5wt line (Cortland I think, I got it from Wal-
> Mart) on a 4-5wt Browning Rod.
>
> Moderate on and off winds. Made 5 - 6 casts in succession with atleast
> 30-40 ft of line out then lifted the line and cast.
>
> I can sure feel the strain on the rod when I did this... Also this cast
> was on grass. I am sure the lift would have been much more difficult had
> I been on water...
>
> Now if I can just get the roll cast more consistent!
>
Michael Eraña
> Speaking of shooting line...hehehe...
>
> In a prior thread, it was spoken that a rod was rated at casting thirty feet
> of line and to consistently cast very much farther was, inessense
> overloading the rod. Stress/crack/break possibilities ensue.
>
> If I remember correctly, someone said that the 'distance casts' were
> performed by shooting the line...all well and good. Myself, I doubt if I
> shoot more than ten or fifeteen feet....never really practiced, might get it
> up to twenty if I sworked on it. Is that average or is there a technique I
> need to brush up on?................
Hmmm. I dunno about over loading the rod... I checked it over VEEERY
closely after I read your post and I can't see enything. I went over very
inch of the rod with a magnifying glass and I couldn't see anything.
I tried to figure out that double haul thing today while I was practising
and I still cen't get it. I would start with short casts to get about 30'
out and then a loooooong back haul until I can feel the rod loading. Then
I start the forward cast. Rod is held straight up so I can feel the line
from the tip of the rod. At the release point I try to make sure that I
let go of the line just as the pressure give me a firm feel. Usually the
line will go shooting out like crazy until I get a loop caught on the
guide or find that I am standing on the line(Ugh). I usually find that my
casting is hampered only by my own oafishness. As for consistency if all
the stars are aligned and I don't have any serious memory loops in the
line then I can make that cast pretty consistently.
I took a tape measure and measured from the reel to the end of the
leader. I only measured the cast if the leader was fully unfurled (not in
a heap). Even so the average was about 50' and longer. I couldn't do any
more than that as the the line would ground behind me before I could make
the cast.
The shooting the line part is not very difficult. Someone told me that I
can squeeze some more distance if I can eliminate the "line slap". They
told me to turn the rod sideways so the reel is at the side. This way the
line will not slap the rod when it shoots.
Now I am gonna try that with my eight weight and a 9wt line...
Michael Eraña
says...
> Asadi
> There are several factors that enter into distance casting such as type
> of line, weight of line, diameter of line and the slickness of the line.
> The single haul and double haul add line speed and shooting adds distance.
> If you are going for distance and don't care about presentation get a
> shooting head. If presentation at about thirty feet and roll casting is
> important get a double taper line. If longer distances are requited with
> good presentation get a weight foreword line. Start by learning to cast
> good tight loops without shocking the line, then learn the single haul.
> When you have that down advance to the double haul. You can practice
> shooting line any time at the end of the foreword cast.
> Ernie Harrison.
>
That's true... At about 30-40' I can lay the line out nice and soft. The
yarn I am using as a fake fly just touches down gently onto the grass. At
about 50-60' I can get the leader unfurled but it does come down quite
far. I practice the long cast as I tend to fish still waters quite a bit
and sometimes the extra few feet are helpful!
Also about the shock... That's something as well. If I cast distance for
a bit and then drop to a short cast I find it difficult to bring the cast
back under control. On the back haul I can feel that I am doing it much
too hard and there is a "shock" when the rod loads. Then when I cast I
also feel the same shock because I am pushing too hard. It usually takes
me a couple of casts to re-adjust.
This upcoming season will tell. I plan on getting some stream time in in
PA (I got my 2000 license today!!!) and also in Wharton State Forest in
Jersey!
Mike Connor
--
news
asadi <asadim...@msn.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
#2WvNEcS$GA.259@cpmsnbbsa05...
> Speaking of shooting line...hehehe...
>
> In a prior thread, it was spoken that a rod was rated at casting thirty
feet
> of line and to consistently cast very much farther was, inessense
> overloading the rod. Stress/crack/break possibilities ensue.
>
> If I remember correctly, someone said that the 'distance casts' were
> performed by shooting the line...all well and good. Myself, I doubt if I
> shoot more than ten or fifeteen feet....never really practiced, might get
it
> up to twenty if I sworked on it. Is that average or is there a technique I
> need to brush up on?................
Any given rod, whether fly rod, spinning rod, surfcasting rod, or whatever,
will cast best when it is loaded with a specific weight. The manufacturers
of other fishing rods usually mark the recommended casting weight on the
butt. If you then use too light a weight, you will not attain maximum
distance, too heavy a weight , and you may strain or even break the rod.
Fly rods are unusual in that they must cast progressively increasing
weights. The more line out, the greater the weight.
Under certain circumstances it is better to "overline" some rods, using a
line # heavier than recommended, as otherwise it will be very difficut to
load the rod for casting at short distances. A short length of the correctly
rated line simply not being heavy enough to load the rod.
The AFTM number states that the rod will cast best with thirty feet of line
of that number outside the rod tip. This is highly subjective, as the
numbers themselves are not an exactly measured quantity, ( depends who
tested the rod ), and the actual weight of lines varies considerably,
depending on the manufacturer.
Attempting to cast a whole DT of the rated number, means casting ninety
feet, which is three times the manufacturers rating. Many rods will be
broken or damaged if you attempt this using normal casting methods.
There are in fact many rods on the market marked #5 which are really #6 etc.
In fact I have even seen one or two stiffish #4 rods, which cast best with a
#6 line.
If you wish maximum distance from any particular rod, you must make a
shooting head to fit the rod exactly. To make a shooting head to fit your
rod, get a double taper line either one or two numbers larger than the rod
rating. Cast this with an easy casting motion until you are casting between
thirty to thirty five feet with perfect ease and no straining or exertion,
and you think the rod is loading OK. Do not attempt to cast any further
with the rod overlined in this way, as you may damage it, and do not go more
than two line numbers higher.
When you are satisfied that you are casting perfectly, lay a cast out, and
cut the line at the rod tip. Attach monofilament running line, or similar
to this length of line ( needle knot, or loops ). You now have a perfect
shooting head, which will never overstrain the rod, and with which
considerable distance is possible. The technique for achieving this
distance is known as the double haul.
Once you have found the perfect length and weight of line for your rod, you
can in future then match any line to this rod quite easily. Just weigh the
length of line you are now using on an accurate balance or weighing machine.
Any line of this weight will also cast perfectly with this rod, irrespective
of length. It is of course not sensible to try casting a #3 line with a #8
rod, as the weight of line required to load the rod is simply too long.
Some people prefer short heads, and others slightly longer ones.
The only disadvantages with a head, are that you can not roll cast as soon
as the head is outside the tip ring, and you must retrieve backing until the
casting line is inside the tip ring before casting again.
For absolutely maximum distance, a short length of lead core line matched to
the rod is the best instrument, this requires impeccable timing if you do
not wish to take one of your ears off, and is useless for most normal
fishing purposes.
Basically a pull on the line by the reel hand, at the start of the back
cast, and then again at the start of the forward cast, gives much increased
line speed, loads the rod better, and increases distance without strain. The
backing is laid out before the cast, preferably in a line tray or similar so
that it can not tangle, and is shot at the end of the forward cast.
The double haul technique is also extremely useful in high winds, or when
casting heavy flies even at short range. It makes for easier casting
generally.
Tight lines !
Mike Connor
Mike Connor
>
> Hmmm. I dunno about over loading the rod... I checked it over VEEERY
> closely after I read your post and I can't see enything. I went over very
> inch of the rod with a magnifying glass and I couldn't see anything.
>
Modern rods are extremely robust, nevertheless constant overloading will
damage or break them.
> I tried to figure out that double haul thing today while I was practising
> and I still cen't get it. I would start with short casts to get about 30'
> out and then a loooooong back haul until I can feel the rod loading. Then
> I start the forward cast.
Double hauling for distance with a normal DT is a waste of time. It is too
difficult to shoot enough line. It works better with a WF line, and best
with a shooting head.
The double haul may be used with a DT for other reasons, for overcoming a
head wind, or casting heavy flies.
Rod is held straight up so I can feel the line
> from the tip of the rod. At the release point I try to make sure that I
> let go of the line just as the pressure give me a firm feel. Usually the
> line will go shooting out like crazy until I get a loop caught on the
> guide or find that I am standing on the line(Ugh). I usually find that my
> casting is hampered only by my own oafishness. As for consistency if all
> the stars are aligned and I don't have any serious memory loops in the
> line then I can make that cast pretty consistently.
>
Casting by "feel" is very difficult. Better to watch your back cast.
Achieving distance is a matter of technique.
> I took a tape measure and measured from the reel to the end of the
> leader. I only measured the cast if the leader was fully unfurled (not in
> a heap). Even so the average was about 50' and longer. I couldn't do any
> more than that as the the line would ground behind me before I could make
> the cast.
>
If the line is grounding on the backcast, then your timing is incorrect. You
must wait for the line to extend fully, and then immediately start your
forward cast, if the line is grounding, you are waiting too long. Turn
slightly sideways when casting , and watch your backcast to eliminate this.
A cast is measured from the casters feet to where the fly lands. In the case
you quoted above, you actually cast about thirty feet of fly line, as your
leader is perhaps nine feet long, and your rod is also nine feet long 50-18
=32.
If you cast a whole double taper then you have actually cast over one
hundred feet. 90 feet line + 9 foot rod+ 9 foot leader = 108 feet.
At extreme distance accuracy and correct turnover are more or less
impossible to achieve.
> The shooting the line part is not very difficult. Someone told me that I
> can squeeze some more distance if I can eliminate the "line slap". They
> told me to turn the rod sideways so the reel is at the side. This way the
> line will not slap the rod when it shoots.
This is not correct, and is bad technique. It is much more difficult to
shoot fly line than it is to shoot running line or proper backing. This is
perfectly normal. Turning the rod sideways will cause considerable
problems.
> Now I am gonna try that with my eight weight and a 9wt line...
I would advise you to use a shooting head instead.
Mike Connor
with a rod. As you say it is basically a trick, which anyone can learn.
It looks very impressive of course, and requires practice, but it is not
particularly difficult.
The main reason people are impressed by this, is because they assume that
someone who can do this just using his arm, must be able to do a lot better
with a rod. While this is in fact usually the case, as only demonstration
casters do it, it is not necessarily so.
It is something that an angler would not normally even try, and most people
have therefore no idea of how difficult or otherwise it may be, they assume
that it is extremely difficult.
It has no practical use as far as fishing is concerned though.
TL
MC
Mike Connor
>If the line is grounding on the backcast, then your timing is incorrect.
You
>must wait for the line to extend fully, and then immediately start your
>forward cast, if the line is grounding, you are waiting too long. Turn
>slightly sideways when casting , and watch your backcast to eliminate this.
One other very common fault which causes the line to hit the ground on the
back cast, is starting your power stroke too late, and allowing your rod to
drift too far back on the back cast.
The rod should be stopped at twelve o clock at the latest, and the
following drift should not go beyond one o clock at the most. If it does
you are actually throwing the ine downwards towards the ground.
Try starting your back cast earlier, and concentrating on throwing the line
"up" behind you. Make sure you stop the rod at twelve, the rest is timing.
Mike Connor
considerable interest I took the liberty of adding yet another addendum.
> The shooting the line part is not very difficult. Someone told me that I
> can squeeze some more distance if I can eliminate the "line slap". They
> told me to turn the rod sideways so the reel is at the side. This way the
> line will not slap the rod when it shoots.
This is not correct, and is bad technique. It is much more difficult to
shoot fly line than it is to shoot running line or proper backing. This is
perfectly normal. Turning the rod sideways will cause considerable
problems. Not the least of which will be the increased torque on your wrist
and arm caused by the reel being off-balance. This is a most uncomfortable
and inefficient way to cast.
"Line slap" as such, only occurs when one tries to shoot heavy fly line, and
the timing is off, and one has coils of slack line. If you release the
line to be shot at the correct moment, and no tangles occur ( or if you take
your foot off it quickly enough ! :))), then little or no slap will occur.
There may be some slap when the line is braked or a tangle occurs, as the
shot line pulls the line taut and jumps up and hits the rod bewteen the
rings, this is however at the end of the cast, and immaterial. It simply
shows that you might have reached greater distance had you shot correctly.
Under normal circumstances the line is under tension throughout the whole
cast, and consequently taut through the rings ( guides ), therefore no slap
can occur, as there is no slack line to be slapped.
The main reason a shooting head is so efficient is that the head only has to
pull thin running line or shooting backing after it. It is impossible to
attain even remotely similar distances using DT or WF or any other lines,
for precisely this reason. It is also pointless trying.
Before somebody takes me to task yet again. I have always advocated accuracy
and delicacy at short ranges as the best way to go. If you can do this, then
you will usually have no problems attaining distance should you at sometime
wish to do so. But it is a good idea to realise that this may only be done
by using the correct technique.
For some fishing distance is required. Last of all, the ability to cast
great distances may be useful, but it does not usually make anybody a better
fisherman per se.
Mike Connor
<SNIP>
> >
> >I can sure feel the strain on the rod when I did this... Also this cast
> >was on grass. I am sure the lift would have been much more difficult had
> >I been on water...
>
Attempting to pick up a large amount of line from water directly will also
overload a rod badly. If you are fishing at extreme distance with a DT line
( for whatever odd reason ), then you should roll cast the line into the air
before going into a smooth back cast. Attempting to lift that amount of line
from the water may break the rod.
>
> >Now if I can just get the roll cast more consistent!
>
> Now there's something that really doesn't work on grass at all!
A correctly executed roll cast works on grass. At short distances on water,
the resistance caused by the line being held in the surface film helps to
load the rod properly. At longer distances this is immaterial. A roll cast
does not overload the rod because the actual cast is executed only on a
relatively small part of the line, and the momentum thus imparted is
transmitted to the rest of the line, which unfolds over its whole length
even after the actual casting action has long since ceased. The line is at
no time fully aerialised by loading the rod.
If you wish to try an experiment which will help your casting considerably.
Get a piece of rope about twenty or thirty feet long, or even a length of
garden hosepipe. If you attempt to lift this in one go and cast it
backwards, you are more than liable to do yourself a damage. However, you
can execute a perfect roll cast from the hand using this material. Practice
sending "loops" along the length of the rope, you will see that the action
required to do this will make the phyiscs necessary for a correct roll cast
more clear. You can also do such tricks with a fly rod and line , once you
know how, and these are often very useful when fishing.
Inability to execute a roll cast on grass points to incorrect technique. It
is quite easy to do. The most common reason for bad roll casting is that
people have been told they must slash downwards with the rod to form the
loop. This is incorrect. The rod should be held pointing up and at a steep
angle, ( about eleven o clock ), the line straight out in front, then the
rod is slowly and smoothly moved backwards behind the body to about one o
clock, just as in a normal cast. The cast is then executed in the normal
manner as for an overhead cast. It is even possible to haul on this cast to
improve distance considerably.
No slashing or exertion or other machinations are required.
Michael Eraña
mroe...@mindspring.com says...
> Congratulations, Michael. You're probably in the top 5 percent of
> casters with respect to distance. You may go 10 years between
> opportunities to actually fish at that distance, but its always nice
> to know you can do it if you have to. And if you can do 60' with a 5
> weight, you can probably do 80+ with an 8 or 9 wt. saltwater rod.
>
> A curiosity question - Given that you can get out there 60' when
> going for distance, how far can you get with accuracy? Take a dinner
> plate or frisbee and set it on the grass. Back off 20 feet or so and
> see how often you can land a fly in the plate. If you can hit 80%,
> back off another 10 feet and try again. If you can get out to 40
> feet and still consistently hit the plate then you're set for 99% of
> the fishing you'll ever do in fresh water. From there, you can try
> varying the conditions a bit - stand with trees in the backcast area,
> put a garbage can in front of the plate, etc. This kind of practice
> will really pay off next time you're on the river.
>
> Michael
>
Hi Michael,
That number was with a 10' radius accuracy (give or take for
sudden micro-bursts of wind). With that distance and in ten casts I could
land 6-7 of ten within a ten foot circle. Promising thought that I could
actually reach further with my 8wt. I have some 9wt line on my salt water
reel so I'll have to try it as my 8wt is fairly stiff. From 40-30 feet I
can put the tippet into a small milk crate that is 2' x 2' about 6 of ten
casts. If I miss it is usually within 1 foot of the crate.
I'd say that the short range accuracy is ther (assuming no tree
trout attack the back cast. The main issue is consistent presentation and
non-over casting. I find that I tend to over muscle the cast which
usually results in a monster tailing loop. Or I can feel the line "snap"
when the loop unfurls. As most of the other things I take too I learned
this pretty quick. Now I am forcing myself to fish in tougher spots to
work on versatility. I think it will be rare that I will be in coditiions
where I will have ample room to make those long casts (Save for saltwater
as I will usually be on a jetty.) Now the target techniques to learn are
bow casting, the double haul, and consistent roll casting. The problem I
have with roll casting is it doesn't work if the leader is submerged. the
roll moves through the line until it gets to the leader and then it's
line the fly was anchored in the water... Ah well. Like I said that's one
for tommorrow.
Michael Eraña
says...
>
<Some segments Snipped>
--
>
> Any given rod, whether fly rod, spinning rod, surfcasting rod, or whatever,
> will cast best when it is loaded with a specific weight. The manufacturers
> of other fishing rods usually mark the recommended casting weight on the
> butt. If you then use too light a weight, you will not attain maximum
> distance, too heavy a weight , and you may strain or even break the rod.
>
> Fly rods are unusual in that they must cast progressively increasing
> weights. The more line out, the greater the weight.
>
> Under certain circumstances it is better to "overline" some rods, using a
> line # heavier than recommended, as otherwise it will be very difficut to
> load the rod for casting at short distances. A short length of the correctly
> rated line simply not being heavy enough to load the rod.
This is one thing I'll try with my eight wieght to a 9wt line.
>
> The AFTM number states that the rod will cast best with thirty feet of line
> of that number outside the rod tip. This is highly subjective, as the
> numbers themselves are not an exactly measured quantity, ( depends who
> tested the rod ), and the actual weight of lines varies considerably,
> depending on the manufacturer.
>
> Attempting to cast a whole DT of the rated number, means casting ninety
> feet, which is three times the manufacturers rating. Many rods will be
> broken or damaged if you attempt this using normal casting methods.
>
Like I said, I find that difficult to see as 40-50' of line behind me is
tough to keep off the ground.
> There are in fact many rods on the market marked #5 which are really #6 etc.
> In fact I have even seen one or two stiffish #4 rods, which cast best with a
> #6 line.
>
Someone once explained it... Why does my rod have a tag of 4-5wt?
Re: Shooting heads... Once you have the 30' or so segment... What do you
splice it to? I think I saw a web site where someone explains this but I
lost track of it.
Michael Eraña
says...
<Snipped>
> "Line slap" as such, only occurs when one tries to shoot heavy fly line, and
> the timing is off, and one has coils of slack line. If you release the
> line to be shot at the correct moment, and no tangles occur ( or if you take
> your foot off it quickly enough ! :))), then little or no slap will occur.
> There may be some slap when the line is braked or a tangle occurs, as the
> shot line pulls the line taut and jumps up and hits the rod bewteen the
> rings, this is however at the end of the cast, and immaterial. It simply
> shows that you might have reached greater distance had you shot correctly.
> Under normal circumstances the line is under tension throughout the whole
> cast, and consequently taut through the rings ( guides ), therefore no slap
> can occur, as there is no slack line to be slapped.
>
Guilty of all of those offences. Usually when I start to get tired the
frequency of the mishaps increases. Even with the stripping basket I am
getting loops tangled. I now think I need to get the liner for the bottom
of the basket that has little cones to keep the line from moving around
in the basket.
> The main reason a shooting head is so efficient is that the head only has to
> pull thin running line or shooting backing after it. It is impossible to
> attain even remotely similar distances using DT or WF or any other lines,
> for precisely this reason. It is also pointless trying.
>
> Before somebody takes me to task yet again. I have always advocated accuracy
> and delicacy at short ranges as the best way to go. If you can do this, then
> you will usually have no problems attaining distance should you at sometime
> wish to do so. But it is a good idea to realise that this may only be done
> by using the correct technique.
>
I fully agree with this. However for me the desire is to be able to reach
the !^%$@$ fish that is rising beyond thirty feet. It's maddening to see
that and I swear I can hear the fish going "nya na na Na na Na!"
> For some fishing distance is required. Last of all, the ability to cast
> great distances may be useful, but it does not usually make anybody a better
> fisherman per se.
>
I'll have to keep this in mind when I go back out to the jetties.
I agree with the distance is not everything. For me this is just another
technique milestone to tuck under my belt.
Now I need to learn all about fishing a stream or a river! (Whew)
Michael Eraña
says...
>
> Modern rods are extremely robust, nevertheless constant overloading will
> damage or break them.
>
Thanks, will take that to heart.
>
> Double hauling for distance with a normal DT is a waste of time. It is too
> difficult to shoot enough line. It works better with a WF line, and best
> with a shooting head.
>
> The double haul may be used with a DT for other reasons, for overcoming a
> head wind, or casting heavy flies.
>
Like most things I like to learn them for the sake of curiosity as well
as that personal monkey on my back to learn everything I can. I think the
double haul thing is much more of an academic pursuit than a practical
one at this point.
>
> Casting by "feel" is very difficult. Better to watch your back cast.
> Achieving distance is a matter of technique.
>
>
The casting by feel thing is like the "force" of fly csating for me.
Trying to beable to "feel" the line behind me is mystical and that's why
I constantly try to get it. Although in actual fishing I am more
interested in the catching that the mysticism. Therefore you'll find me
whipping my head around for sure.
>
> If the line is grounding on the backcast, then your timing is incorrect. You
> must wait for the line to extend fully, and then immediately start your
> forward cast, if the line is grounding, you are waiting too long. Turn
> slightly sideways when casting , and watch your backcast to eliminate this.
>
> A cast is measured from the casters feet to where the fly lands. In the case
Since I was measuing by myself I did the following:
After a "good cast" I would put the rod down with the reel at the tip of
my toes and the tip pointing to the end of the line. Then the measurement
would go from the reel to the tippet. The rod is a 7' long. So minus the
rod length it's still not too bad.
Michael Eraña
says...
NOW THAT"S A GREAT EXPLAINATION!!!! Now you've got me worked up. It's 8
in the morning and I am seaking around the house wishing I could go out.
I'll have to try that on the lawn this afternoon!
I was doing the slashing thing BTW...
Many thanks!
Mike Connor
If you use the correct techniques you will reach far greater distances than
you imagined possible, and not be in the least bit tired. Once you can cast
properly, you can cast properly anywhere, it makes no difference whether on
a river, the ocean or stillwater.
TL
MC
Mike Connor
> I'd say that the short range accuracy is ther (assuming no tree
> trout attack the back cast. The main issue is consistent presentation and
> non-over casting. I find that I tend to over muscle the cast which
> usually results in a monster tailing loop. Or I can feel the line "snap"
> when the loop unfurls. As most of the other things I take too I learned
> this pretty quick. Now I am forcing myself to fish in tougher spots to
> work on versatility. I think it will be rare that I will be in coditiions
> where I will have ample room to make those long casts (Save for saltwater
> as I will usually be on a jetty.) Now the target techniques to learn are
> bow casting, the double haul, and consistent roll casting. The problem I
> have with roll casting is it doesn't work if the leader is submerged. the
> roll moves through the line until it gets to the leader and then it's
> line the fly was anchored in the water... Ah well. Like I said that's one
> for tommorrow.
This again ( sunken leader not coming up ) points to incorrect technique.
A large heavy wet fly may act somewhat as an anchor, but this should still
not be a problem with correct technique. I thought of a bit better
description in the meantime, which might help you, here it is.
The golden rule by the way with all casting is that you can not make a good
forward cast without a good backcast. This requires that you set the cast up
properly. In all casts the line will do exactly what your rod tip does, and
this does exactly what your thumb does. Do not break your wrist at any time
during these casts.
The roll cast: In two parts,
THE BACK CAST:
Line straight out in front of you. Raise the rod slowly
Reach slowly and smoothly straight out behind you with the rod until you are
at full arms stretch behind you, with the rod pointing between one and two o
clock, and the rod leaning slightly to the right.
Pause. Turn and face your target. NOW DROP YOUR ELBOW, so that your thumb
is about level with your ear. The line is hanging down behind from the rod
tip in an arc, and most of the line is still straight out in front of you.
Check that the rod is still pointing to between one and two o clock.
nearer two is better ).
That was the end of the back cast in this case.
If you get this back cast wrong the cast will not work. If you set the rod
up too far back, say 3 o clock, the line will go too high on the forward
cast. If you set up too far forward, say 12 o Clock, then the line will go
too low, landing close to you and running along the surface, ending with a
splash as the line and leader land. The reason for leaning the rod out to
the right is because otherwise the fly will pass too close to you on the
forward cast, and may stick in you. ( Often under the chin ! ), this is
painful and unecessary.
THE FORWARD CAST:
Fix a point on the horizon with your eyes, and drive the rod straight
towards this point with your thumb to full arms stretch. Use your arm and
shoulder muscles to do this, not your wrist.
If you have done this correctly the line will roll out ABOVE THE SURFACE,
extend fully in the air, including leader and fly, and land gently upon the
surface as in any other normal cast. There will be no disturbance of the
water whatsoever. The cast works perfectly well on grass as well, or indeed
any other surface, including polished gymnasium floors.
Remember, you are attempting to cast FORWARD ! There is no point in
slashing the rod tip downwards. Follow the instructions above to the
letter, and you will have no problems.
If you wish to cast on your left hand side for instance, due to obstructions
or whatever, or in a bad wind, take the rod to your opposite ear, and follow
the instructions already given.
The same applies incidentally for just about any other cast. Just take the
rod to your opposite ear. If you are right handed to your left ear for
instance. This is good if you are not ambidextrous.
If you wish to try an experiment showing graphically why most people cast
wrongly, do the following. Kneel down in front of your wife or girlfriend,
or anybody else you like. Ask them to hold their hand out, and try to
prevent you from pushing it away. Now keeping your elbow and upper arm low
and close to your body push the hand out of the way. You will find it is
quite easy.
Now extend your arm somewhat so that your right hand is above your ear, try
again to push the hand away. It is not so easy at all now.
Now extend your arm so that your upper arm is about level with your
shoulder. You will find it almost impossible to push the hand away, you
simply do not have enough strength to do it.
This is another main reason why many people are lousy casters. If your
right thumb goes much above your ear on any normal cast, then you are a
lousy caster. You lack power and control.
These are not my words by the way, but the words of Jack Martin, one of the
greatest casters who ever lived.
Mike Connor
> Like I said, I find that difficult to see as 40-50' of line behind me is
> tough to keep off the ground.
The reason for your back cast dropping is either because your backward power
stroke is too late or too long. The rod MUST stop at 12 o clock. Or because
you are waiting too long before commencing your forward stroke, or a
combination of both. It is immaterial how much line you have out. The more
line you have out then the more critical the timing though.
> > There are in fact many rods on the market marked #5 which are really #6
etc.
> > In fact I have even seen one or two stiffish #4 rods, which cast best
with a
> > #6 line.
> >
>
> Someone once explained it... Why does my rod have a tag of 4-5wt?
Normally this means it should be used with a #4 DT or with a #5 WF line.
>
> Re: Shooting heads... Once you have the 30' or so segment... What do you
> splice it to? I think I saw a web site where someone explains this but I
> lost track of it.
If you want maximum distance 20 lb Amnesia. This is a low memory flat
monofilament. If you are not too worried about maximum distance, then
bricklayers chalkline, or proprietary running line ( Many salmon fishermen
use the running line from LOOP ).
Mike Connor
have no problem with that. The only way to do it properly though is to
learn the correct technique. "Feel" is no substitute for good technique.
TL
MC
Mike Connor
>
> NOW THAT"S A GREAT EXPLAINATION!!!! Now you've got me worked up. It's 8
> in the morning and I am seaking around the house wishing I could go out.
> I'll have to try that on the lawn this afternoon!
>
> I was doing the slashing thing BTW...
>
> Many thanks!
>
Damn ! I should have read this post first ! :)))
Whatever, try it. It is so easy, that you will probably think it is a fluke
the first time you get it right, but it is not a fluke. The set up is the
most important part.
TL
MC
John A Schroeder
"Michael Eraña" wrote:
>
> I tried to figure out that double haul thing today while I was practising
> and I still cen't get it. I would start with short casts to get about 30'
> out and then a loooooong back haul until I can feel the rod loading. Then
> I start the forward cast. Rod is held straight up so I can feel the line
> from the tip of the rod. At the release point I try to make sure that I
> let go of the line just as the pressure give me a firm feel. Usually the
> line will go shooting out like crazy until I get a loop caught on the
> guide or find that I am standing on the line(Ugh). I usually find that my
> casting is hampered only by my own oafishness. As for consistency if all
> the stars are aligned and I don't have any serious memory loops in the
> line then I can make that cast pretty consistently.
>
> I took a tape measure and measured from the reel to the end of the
> leader. I only measured the cast if the leader was fully unfurled (not in
> a heap). Even so the average was about 50' and longer. I couldn't do any
> more than that as the the line would ground behind me before I could make
> the cast.
>
> The shooting the line part is not very difficult. Someone told me that I
> can squeeze some more distance if I can eliminate the "line slap". They
> told me to turn the rod sideways so the reel is at the side. This way the
> line will not slap the rod when it shoots.
>
> Now I am gonna try that with my eight weight and a 9wt line...
>
For distance casting underline the rod instead of overlining it. Try a seven
weight line on that eight weight rod for the maximum possible distance.
To help control the tangles (and slap) when you shoot line don't just let go of
the line with your line hand, make the line shoot through an "O" formed by your
thumb and first finger.
Mel Krieger has a video tape on fly casting that expains the double haul very
well. Could probably be rented from your local fly shop for a buck or two. I
liked the tape so well I bought it.
Mike Connor
OK Folks, I don't know why some of you don't post to the group with these
questions. I don't think anybody will bite you. Whatever, for the few who
e-mailed here is a description of the overhead cast. For the single and
double hauls, and some other casts like single and double Spey casts, there
is really no substitute for being shown how to do it properly by a good
caster. If enough people ask I will attempt it any way, but it is difficult
to describe in words.
It is quite immaterial what action a rod has, if you can overhead cast with
it, then you can also Spey cast with it. It is not necessary to buy any
particular rod.
I am right handed, and all instructions are for right handers. If you are
left handed just change them round in your mind.
THE OVERHEAD CAST.
Like all casts, the preparation is extremely important. You must grip the
rod firmly with your thumb pointing straight up the rod, your wrist locked
with the butt of the rod touching your forearm. No other grip gives you
sufficient power and control.
The line should be gripped under your index finger, AND under the small
finger of the rod hand. The line under the small finger is only released
when a fish is hooked.
Stance is not particularly important. You may be forced into all sorts of
positions when fishing, so it does not matter much how you stand when you
are practising. If you wish to watch your backcast at first. then it is
better to put the left foot slightly forward, and turn your shoulders
sideways to almost face the rod.
You must remember at all times that you have the most power and control when
your arm and elbow are close to your body. Think of punching somebody, you
would not move your arm out away from the side of your body to do this, so
why do it when casting ?
Keep your elbow tight in to your body, and this automatically ensures that
you have maximum power in your strokes, and also that your thumb tracks on a
straight line, and consequently the rod tip does the same. This results in
complete accuracy as well.
You must now imagine a large clock face beside you, the pivot of which is
YOUR RIGHT EAR. This is important, it is not your elbow or your shoulder
or anything else at all. IT IS YOUR RIGHT EAR.
We will assume a nine foot rod. For much shorter or much longer rods the
instructions regarding the angles on the clock face must be adjusted
accordingly.
So nine o clock is straight out in front of you on a level with your ear.
Three o clock is straight out behind you on a level with your ear. Twelve o
clock is straight up.
The overhead cast is the most usual cast for most anglers, and it is also
the most mechanically efficient cast. It provide the greatest accuracy, the
greatest delicacy, the greatest distance, and is also about the easiest cast
to learn.
Before the overhead cast is started, the line must be laid out in a straight
line in front of you. This is normally achieved by pulling some line off the
reel and waggling the rod to shake some line out, and then a roll cast is
done to get the line straight out in front of you. On running water you can
just let the current take your line out. We assume here that you are
practising on grass.
There must be no slack anywhere in the line. The line must be gripped
tightly under the index finger and little finger of the rod hand.
An overhead cast is exactly that. It must go overhead. When executed
properly the fly and line will never come any nearer to you than the length
of the rod. Nine feet in this case. Moving your arm out to the side, or
leaning the rod out too far will simply cause loss of power and control,
causing all sorts of unnecessary faults.
At the start however, for safety's sake, keep your elbow and arm tight to
your body, but lean the rod slightly out to the right. This will avoid you
getting smacked in the neck or worse if you bugger up. Eye protection must
be worn at all times, even when no fly is mounted. A leader flicked across
your eyeball at normal casting speeds will cut it open like a hot knife
through butter.
There are five basic parts to a successful overhead cast. These are:
THE LIFT:
If you apply power to the line immediately, you will
snatch it from the ground ( or water ) causing a lot of commotion. You
should lift the line smoothly and not too fast until the rod is pointing to
ten o clock. A moving line is not held as hard by surface tension. DO NOT
lift the line by bending your wrist, use only your forearm and bend only
your elbow. The butt of the rod should be touching your forearm at all
times.
The lift must start with the tip ring almost touching the water surface. Do
the lift slowly, there is no hurry, and the slower the lift the less chance
of disturbing the water.
THE FLICK:
At the moment your rod tip reaches ten o clock, you
immediately flick the rod powerfully upwards, throwing the line high into
the air behind you. There are various analogies here. My favourite is to
imagine that you are attempting to flick water off a large imaginary
paintbrush.
The most common fault here is not "flicking" the rod, but sweeping it, which
will not load it properly. You should think of this phase as an "upcast" by
the way, not a backcast. This flick is the most powerful part of the whole
casting sequence. The flick is put into the rod by the biceps alone. DO NOT
USE ANY WRIST MOVEMENT HERE. The wrist must be locked and the rod butt still
touching the forearm. THE ROD IS AN EXTENSION OF THE LOCKED WRIST AND ARM.
Any deviation from this will cause problems. The strength of this flick
should be enough to let the line flow out behind the rod and no more. The
rod tip should not vibrate. Do not overpower the flick, as your line will
otherwise hit the ground behind you, even when you stop the rod correctly.
The flick should end exactly beside your right ear. If you have done this
correctly the rod will stop no later than 12.30 on the clock face. The rod
tip has tracked upwards all the time here, and that is exactly what you
wanted it to do.
DURING ALL THIS YOUR UPPER ARM HAS BARELY MOVED !!!!!!!. Your elbow and arm
muscles ( biceps) doing all the work. One should not attempt to immobilise
the elbow and arm by gripping books etc, between the elbow and the body, as
this is more than likely to cause other faults, but the upper arm and elbow
SHOULD HARDLY MOVE THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCEDURE !!!!
THE PAUSE:
Quite a long time is required for the line to roll
out straight behind the rod tip. Watch your back cast ( remember to turn
your left foot and shoulders forward from the start to do this, do not just
turn your head, this will cause other faults ). The behaviour of the line in
the air at this time is entirely dependent on the speed and track of the rod
tip during the flick. Hardly anything else will influence this, apart from a
very strong wind. At the beginning of this pause, as soon as the rod stops,
the line begins to roll over the top of the rod. This is often referred to
as "forming the loop". One may think of this as a long thin "U" shape lying
on its side, which rolls out completely until the line is extended straight
behind. A narrow loop is more streamlined than a wide loop, and will go
further for far less effort. The commonest fault which occurs here is that
the caster seeing his loop beginning to "droop" towards the ground, starts
his forward cast immediately, the line and fly are still travelling
backwards at high speed. The result is a cracking noise, caused by the fly
breaking the sound barrier at 720 miles an hour which is roughly the speed
of sound at sea level, and the leader unable to stand the strain breaks
immediately. The fly is accelerated to God knows where at one hell of a
rate. A normal size fourteen dry fly will break 6LB breaking strain nylon
quite easily under these conditions. Lighter tippets stand no chance at all.
It has been said by many people that you should wait for a "tug" at the end
of the line, or "feel" for the line pulling on the rod tip.
THIS IS ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT. If you feel anything at all then you have put too
much power into the backcast. If you have done everything correctly you will
not feel anything at all. It is also sometimes said that the rod is loaded
by the line going backwards, this is also not true for normal casting. If
this were so a forward cast would not be necessary, one would just have to
wait for the rod to unload and a perfect forward cast would result, this is
patently not the case. So, the line has flowed out straight and high behind
the rod, there are no "wiggles" or bumps in it, the rod is absolutely still
at 12.30, and you may now start ......
THE DRIVE:
The only way to achieve a good powerful drive forward
of the rod tip is to drive powerfully forwards with the thumb. Maximum power
is obtained when the rod tip moves straight forward. Aim about a foot above
the surface. This may be adjusted in a head wind, it depends whether you
wish the fly to alight gently, or to slap down a bit harder. It also depends
somewhat on distance and line weight etc, but try a foot above for now.
This phase is a long powerful smooth drive with the thumb starting beside
the right ear and tracking out in a straight line to full arms stretch. No
jerky or wrist movements or anything similar is used here, they will all
cause problems, usually wind knots among other things.
The result of this drive is that the line rolls out above the water, the
leader extends, and the fly floats about a foot above the surface.
THE DRIFT, or FOLLOW THROUGH:
The drift down is completed by drawing the thumb down
from its present position to the position normally used when shaking hands,
which is the position we started in. If you do not do this immediately on
completing the "Drive", then the line will sag below the rod tip, drawing
the fly back along the surface of the water.
That was it. Sounds complex, but it is quite easy really. Just remember, the
line goes where the thumb goes. Do not break your wrist. Everything else is
just a little practice. My wife managed it in one Saturday afternoon, and
she had never cast before in her life. When she took her angling test here,
even the "instructors" at the course looked pretty sick compared to her.
This is not difficult at all, just follow the instructions to the letter,
and it will work perfectly.
If there is further interest, I will try to describe the other casts as
well.
Mike Connor
Wind knots are caused by tailing loops, which are caused by applying too
much effort. This causes jerks and vibrations in the rod tip after the cast
has been stopped. This is transferred to the line, when this vibration
rwaches the end of the line, the fly is flipped back dropping below the
standing line, it might just catch on the line, but it will also often go
through the loop it made when tailing. And this is what anglers usually call
a wind knot. Breaking the wrist, aerialising too much line, "flicking" on
the forward cast, will all cause wind knots. Cocking the wrist on the
backcast will also cause tailing loops.
Line twist:
Line twist is most often caused by incorrect casting. If the backcast goes
back low and to the side, and the forward cast comes forwadr over the top of
the rod, then the line gets a half twist from the tip ring on every backcast
and on every forward cast. These twists move down the rod and gather in the
slack line between the butt ring and the reel. When trying to shoot line a
hopeless tangle is the result. Line twist is not caused by mending.
Line fails to shoot:
The usual reason for shooting failure, is letting go of the line too soon.
If a shoot is attempted even a tiny moment before the rod stops, power is
lost, and the line will not shoot as far as it should, it may even not shoot
at all. One symptom of this fault is that the line gets warpped around the
rod below the butt ring. Failing to release the line completely will cause
extra friction, and the line will not shoot as far as it should. Forming a
"O" with the thumb and forefinger as is often advised also just causes
friction. Let go of the line altogether, and the only friction which occurs
will be at the butt ring, and there is nothing you can do about this. If the
butt ring is too small you could change it for a larger one.
There is a trick for reducing "coning" of the line, but it is not very
popular, although it works perfectly, and that is to fit two butt rings
about four inches apart. This ensures almost perfect shooting. An eminent
caster Mr .Peter Mackenzie Philps mentioned this idea several times as I
recall, but it has never caught on. If you want maximuk distance try it.
Various Pains :
Pain is invariably caused by incorrect casting. Typical symptoms are:
Wrist pain = caused by flexing the wrist too much. A wrist which is not
flexed when casting will not hurt.
Forearm hurts = Rod gripped too tightly.
Shoulders hurt= Gripping too tightly with both hands.
Headache = Wear polaroids to cut down the glare, if you have a headache and
are squinting into the ripple you will neither cast nor fish well.
These are the commonest faults.
If anybody wants to hear about some other casts, reach cast, curve cast,
slack line cast etc. Then please reply to the NG.
TL
MC
Ernie Harrison
and correcting the errors they make than trying to tell them about in
writing. I learned to cast from reading books and it was a slow process.
It wasn't easy to see the errors I made. One thing that helped was learning
the foreword cast is the same as the back cast. I got so I could keep 30
feet of line in the air and slowly rotate under it while keeping it going in
the same direction without shocking the line or letting the cast drop in
either direction. After a slow turn of 180 degrees my foreword cast was
where my back cast had been.
Ernie Harrison
Mike Connor wrote in message <83j06m$di9$1...@news05.btx.dtag.de>...
>OK Folks, I don't know why some of you don't post to the group with these
>questions. I don't think anybody will bite you. Whatever, for the few who
>e-mailed here is a description of the overhead cast. For the single and
>double hauls, and some other casts like single and double Spey casts, there
>is really no substitute for being shown how to do it properly by a good
>caster. If enough people ask I will attempt it any way, but it is difficult
>to describe in words.
<snip>
>Mike Connor
Michael Eraña
says...
<Snipped>
> monofilament. If you are not too worried about maximum distance, then
> bricklayers chalkline, or proprietary running line ( Many salmon fishermen
> use the running line from LOOP ).
Chalk line?!? (You mean the stuff that they use to flick a powder line
onto a surface?
Michael Eraña
says...
<Snip>
> The roll cast: In two parts,
>
> THE BACK CAST:
>
Once again.. much better. I'll print that and take outside with me when I
go to practice...
Charlie Wilson
jluebeck wrote:
> Radio Shack sells a gizmo for golfers to find the distance from the lie to
> the hole. Sounds like you have found a new use for it. "You are 25' 7"
> from the rise. I suggest a 5 wt. fwd. with your cast angled 30 degrees to
> the wind."
Did you used to caddy for that guy in Aspen?
Peter T
<snip>
> If anybody wants to hear about some other casts, reach cast, curve
cast,
> slack line cast etc. Then please reply to the NG.
>
> TL
> MC
I do, I do! All of the above.
Pete
Mike Connor
--
news
Michael Eraña <merana67...@hotmail.com> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag:
MPG.12c712623...@news1.rdc2.pa.home.com...
> In article <83iq9e$cb7$2...@news05.btx.dtag.de>, MIKE-...@t-online.de
> says...
> <Snipped>
> > If you want maximum distance 20 lb Amnesia. This is a low memory flat
> > monofilament. If you are not too worried about maximum distance, then
> > bricklayers chalkline, or proprietary running line ( Many salmon
fishermen
> > use the running line from LOOP ).
>
> Chalk line?!? (You mean the stuff that they use to flick a powder line
> onto a surface?
>
Basically yes. It is also used for staking out lines on building sites. It
is a tough braided polypropylene cord, which comes in several thicknesses,
floats intrinsically, is rotproof, shoots very well, ( I showed some salmon
fishing friends of mine the stuff, and now they use nothing else), it is
cheap, and can also be used for making braided loops etc. In short,
wonderful stuff.
TL
MC
kerry evans
cast and slack cast. I have printed your recipe for the overhead cast and
inserted it in my reference notebook. Thanx Kerry Evans
"Mike Connor" <MIKE-...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:83j06m$di9$1...@news05.btx.dtag.de...
Mike Connor
THE SLACK LINE CAST
This cast is most useful on running water, to help ensure a drag free
presentation. Do a normal overhead cast as already described, and
immediately the rod stops after the forward drive, simply waggle the rod
from side to side about two feet in each direction. This will send a series
of curves along the line and leader, and these will land as "slack" on the
water. If you waggle the rod early in the cast , the slack will be nearer
the end of the line, if you waggle a bit later, the slack will be nearer the
rod tip. The trick is to position the slack over the current, to keep your
fly in position for longer.
THE REACH CAST
This is a cast for throwing a large neat belly of line in either direction,
and still landing your fly on target. Do a normal overhead cast as
described, and then as the forward drive stops, reach hand, arm, and rod,
out to the side, and back again, in one slow easy motion. Try to time it
so that the rod comes back to its normal position as the fly actually lands.
You can cast around obstacles with this cast as well. It is an excellent
method of "pre-mending" the line as well.
THE CURVE CAST
This is used for presenting a fly to a fish either behind an obstacle, or so
as to avoid lining him. It is simply an overhead cast turned on its side,
and the forward delivery is slightly overpowered. This will cause the
leader to curve round before it lands. This requires some practice to
master.
I will carry on with some more as soon as I get the time. It takes quite a
while to formulate exactly what one means in these descriptions so that they
are not misunderstood. I hope to put a series of photos up on my site of all
these casts at a later date.
TL
MC
daytripper
wrote:
>
>THE SLACK LINE CAST
>
>This cast is most useful on running water, to help ensure a drag free
>presentation. Do a normal overhead cast as already described, and
>immediately the rod stops after the forward drive, simply waggle the rod
>from side to side about two feet in each direction. This will send a series
>of curves along the line and leader, and these will land as "slack" on the
>water. If you waggle the rod early in the cast , the slack will be nearer
>the end of the line, if you waggle a bit later, the slack will be nearer the
>rod tip. The trick is to position the slack over the current, to keep your
>fly in position for longer.
[snip]
Alternatively, there's always the "pile" cast...
blackcat
<casting tutoring snipped>
Mike,
This seems that it would be a good addition to your website.
bc.
Peter T
have a need to fish with you.
Pete
Mike Connor <MIKE-...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:83jmu0$iie$1...@news06.btx.dtag.de...
>
> THE SLACK LINE CAST
>
> This cast is most useful on running water, to help ensure a drag free
> presentation. Do a normal overhead cast as already described, and
> immediately the rod stops after the forward drive, simply waggle the
rod
> from side to side about two feet in each direction. This will send a
series
> of curves along the line and leader, and these will land as "slack" on
the
> water. If you waggle the rod early in the cast , the slack will be
nearer
> the end of the line, if you waggle a bit later, the slack will be
nearer the
> rod tip. The trick is to position the slack over the current, to keep
your
> fly in position for longer.
>
>
jluebeck
different geography.
Joe
--
Jim Bennett
Michael Eraña wrote in message ...
>
I tried to figure out that double haul thing today while I was practicing
>and I still cen't get it.
Michael, I didn't think I would ever learn the double haul... am a still a
long way from great. I really feel that trying to learn the double haul
without someone there to watch and instruct is a waste of time. I did it by
myself and developed bad habits that took forever to eliminate before I
finally got it. Almost every flyshop has someone that will take you out on
the lawn and teach you in no time. Why didn't I do this...because I'm an
idiot.
jim
John Knight
>SNIPPED
> Casting a whole line from the hand is not at all the same thing as doing
it
> with a rod. As you say it is basically a trick, which anyone can learn.
> It looks very impressive of course, and requires practice, but it is not
> particularly difficult.
>
> It has no practical use as far as fishing is concerned though.
>
> TL
> MC
Mike,
It could save buying all those $800 rods <G>
BTW, a few months ago I met the Australian casting champion Peter Hayes.
Quite remarkably he is also Australian champion fly fisherman (I say
"remarkably" since historically many competition casters have worried more
about their casting than catching fish).
He uses a rod (<G>), and his casting is the most impressive I've ever seen,
with uncanny accuracy and super smooth distance.
His teaching style is different, but everyone here now is promoting it -
proving there is always something new to learn. I don't know if it came from
European or US tournament casting.
It has 3 main principles;
1/ Tournament style grip and hand position
Grip the rod with the thumb on top (as is normal), then rotate the wrist out
as far as possible so you can see all four knuckles and the reel is sticking
out sideways - Wrist and arm posture/motion being similar to throwing a
ball.
2/ Cast strictly overhead with the rod vertical.The rod must travel in
perfectly straight lines, forward and back (no arcing).
3/ The forward cast must be in the same direction as the back cast.
In pure power application, some good casters in our Club added 15' in ten
minutes using Peters techniques. Accuracy also much improved too, due (I
think) to the locked wrist and straight line casting plane.
My first recommendation for any caster who wants to get better, novice,
intermediate or advanced is to hire a professional for one on one coaching -
just like a good fishing guide, a good casting instructor can teach you a
lot very quickly.
Cheers
JK
John A Schroeder
>
> The usual reason for shooting failure, is letting go of the line too soon.
> If a shoot is attempted even a tiny moment before the rod stops, power is
> lost, and the line will not shoot as far as it should, it may even not shoot
> at all. One symptom of this fault is that the line gets warpped around the
> rod below the butt ring. Failing to release the line completely will cause
> extra friction, and the line will not shoot as far as it should. Forming a
> "O" with the thumb and forefinger as is often advised also just causes
> friction. Let go of the line altogether, and the only friction which occurs
> will be at the butt ring, and there is nothing you can do about this. If the
> butt ring is too small you could change it for a larger one.
> There is a trick for reducing "coning" of the line, but it is not very
> popular, although it works perfectly, and that is to fit two butt rings
> about four inches apart. This ensures almost perfect shooting. An eminent
> caster Mr .Peter Mackenzie Philps mentioned this idea several times as I
> recall, but it has never caught on. If you want maximuk distance try it.
>
Form the "O". The benefits are many. Friction yes, tangles no. The ability to
control
the completion of the shoot is very important. (do you ever fish the banks?)
Consider the source, the advice comes from Lefty Kreh. I follow it because he's
right.
Mike Connor
"John A Schroeder" <j...@srv.net> wrote in message
news:3862DA77...@srv.net...
<SNIP>
> Form the "O". The benefits are many. Friction yes, tangles no. The
ability to
> control
> the completion of the shoot is very important. (do you ever fish the
banks?)
>
> Consider the source, the advice comes from Lefty Kreh. I follow it
because he's
> right.
>
Even if God himself told me something ( which he has not done yet ), I would
first try it myself and see what the results are. Blindly believing
something that somebody says because he is who he is, is not a very good
basis for improvement of anything. The fact remains that any friction
introduced by any method will reduce the possible distance.
There is no way to control the completion of a shoot, apart from braking or
stopping the line, which will have other deleterious effects. This is only
necessary if you have shot too much line, which when attempting to obtain
maximum distance, you can not by definition do. As soon as the line is shot,
all control is lost. In the same way all control apart from braking or
stopping is lost when you cast a lead weight. As soon as the object is in
free flight you can not influence it in any way whatsoever, apart from
braking or stopping. A fly-line is no different.
Could you perhaps state some of the "many benefits". I know of none
whatsoever, and neither do any of the other tournament casters or casting
teachers I know.
The two major disadvantages are considerably increased friction and the
tendency to tangle caused by the line being routed through the "o" at a
short distance above the reel, and at an acute angle, instead of allowing
the butt ring to do its job and remove the coning there, at a much less
acute angle. This is simple physics and common sense. If what you say was
true then all good rods would be fitted with a large butt ring just above
the reel,or the butt, I wonder why this is not so ?
TL
MC
--
"In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the
impossible"
http://www.mikeconnor.de
Mike Connor
"Mike Connor" <MIKE-...@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:83v1fa$1pp$1...@news04.btx.dtag.de...
I got out Mr Kreh´s casting book, and checked. He does indeed say that this
"o" method is better, for one specific purpose "to control the distance that
the line is shot by braking or stopping the line with the left hand". His
explanation is that the line may be braked or stopped at will at any
distance, or and again I quote "when the fly is exactly over the target".
First of all, when attempting pure distance, accuracy is invariably
secondary. Secondly, if accuracy is required, then this is better obtained
by accurately gauging the distance to be shot before one shoots. Braking
and stopping the line will cause all sorts of problems when you are
attempting to be accurate as well. Simply gauging the distance correctly,
and applying the correct amount of power to the cast is much simpler. So I
dont even agree with him here either.
TL
MC
Mike Connor
used for "normal" fishing. It is not generally used for obtaining accuracy
at great distance, or indeed for casting delicately and accurately to
individual fish rising in the distance. This would probably not be a lot of
use anyway. It is normally used for the following reasons:
To fish more water effectively. Longer cast = more water covered.
To reach and keep your fly in the "taking area" as long as possible.
When using sinking heads, to ensure that you get enough line out to obtain
and maintain a reasonable sink rate, and at a reasonable distance.
If you use a full line, and even assuming you can cast it all, which is
unlikely in the extreme, then, if the lake is ninety feet deep, after half
an age, your line will be hanging almost vertically below the rod tip. In
such a case you would be better advised to fish a jigging rig.
By casting a sinking head to a good distance, and even paying out more
backing as it sinks if necessary, you will reach a reasonable depth in a
reasonable time frame, and at a distance, although of course way below you,
which will allow a half-way sensible retrieve.
Distance casting with dry flies or tiny nymphs or similar is a complete
waste of time usually. Not even a semblance of accurate and delicate
presentation may be achieved. Certainly not if techniques like braking and
stopping are used.
Overshooting line and then stopping or braking it is the result of
overpowering the cast in the first place, and failing to judge the distance
to be shot correctly. It is at best a poor substitute for correct casting,
and will cause numerous faults. Far better to cast properly in the first
place.
It is patently obvious that what one person considers a long cast, is more
or less a joke to somebody else who can cast a lot further. For normal
trout fishing on rivers and streams, I would consider a thirty-five foot
cast extremely long, and would not normally do it. There is little point.
For Salmon fishing on a large river a one hundred foot cast, and sometimes a
lot more is the order of the day.
For saltwater fishing, and some other type of lake fishing, a one hundred
and twenty foot cast, especially when over deep water accompanied by paying
out backing after the cast, is normal.
If the only type of fishing you do is normal stream or river fishing for
trout with small flies such as dry flies, and small nymphs etc, then you do
not need to learn to cast any distance. For the other disciplines
mentioned, if you can not achieve the distances mentioned, using the
appropriate gear, then you will not catch much.
Tight lines!
Mike Connor
--
John A Schroeder
I am not given to long posts, but having been rightly accused of being dogmatic
I feel obligated to elaborate.
I find the "O" useful not just because Lefty says do it. I found it solved a
number of vexing problems for me. First, the kind of fishing I do is all fresh
water, usually on lakes or large rivers. On lakes distance is important,
particulary when fishing from a boat, because you just can't approach larger
fish very closely. I don't care how stealthy you think you are, a long cast is
necessary often enough to make it a way of life. Also, the longer the fly is in
the water, the more fish will be caught (hence the effectiveness of trolling, a
long cast is like trolling from one spot). On rivers I mostly fish streamers on
shooting head systems (the Teeny 200 is my most frequently used line). When I
am using a floating line it is usually to shoot some pretty big streamers up
against the bank. The streamers must land within inches of the bank and they
must hit with a splat, and you must start your retrieve as soon as your
streamers hit the water (yes, streamers, two being a very effective setup). The
distance required varies with the quality of the rowing, but is seldom less
than 30 feet with occasional casts of 60-80 feet being needed. Always, the wind
is a potential enemy.
The casting requirements for the above types of fishing are:
1) you must be able to make long casts,
2) you must be in control of the line at all times,
3) you should not waste time, energy, and target opportunities false casting
more than absolutely necessary
To meet these requirements I have made the double haul my standard day-to-day
cast
and have acquired the habit shooting as much line as I can and of never
releasing the line with my line hand. What problems has this solved for me?
1) when I allowed the line to shoot unimpeded by the "O" the line frequently
tangled in the first guide or, worse yet, wrapped around the rod and hung on the
reel handle or hook keeper. If this happens before the line has spent most of
its energy the line will throw quite a shock back into the rod (like closing the
bail on a spinning reel mid-cast). The "O"
entirely solved this problem.
2) when I allowed the line to shoot unimpeded by the "O" I always had to reach
for the line after the cast hit the water. This fumbling around for the line
delayed applying the first couple of down-stream mends that are possible when a
sinking line first hits the water. The first mend can really help sink the fly
and set up the drift, but isn't possible after the Teeny 200 has sunk for even a
full second. The "O" solved this problem as well. I just tighten my fingers as
the line touches down and flip that first mend, instantly.
3) when I allowed the line to shoot unimpeded by the "O" I often left two nice
streamers hanging in the river bank trees because I over shot my shore line
target by a few inches. The "O" solved this problem as well. Again, I just
tighten my fingers when it becomes apparent that I am missing the mark.
4) as in 2) above, if you are fumbling around trying find the line you are not
stripping during that critical period when the streamers are within the first
two feet of the shore line. You might as well not even bother to fish the banks
if you are not FISHING while the fly is in the critical zone. The "O" allows
me to strip as soon as the fly splats down, and just as importantly, allows me
to set the hook when the carnivore/cannibal comes to dinner.
If you went to a distance casting contest I suppose the O could cost you the
championship, but if you visit the river failing to use it might cost you the
best fish of the trip. Also, my habits are not aquired soley on the say-so of
some famous muckitymuck. However, I always listen carefully to what the
muckitymucks have to say, and then test, test, test. Mr. Connor, your ideas
are thoughtfull and well articulated, but don't seem to have been well tested.
Are you fortunate enough to spend many days on the water?
Mike Connor wrote:
Mike Connor
>
<SNIP>
I fish occasionally, some might say a lot, sometimes I even catch a few. If
you want to use an "o" then do so, I dont mind at all. It is extremely
deleterious to distance casting, which was the subject under discussion, and
brings virtually no advantages in any other circumstances, but if you like
it, do it. None of the reasons you give are convincing to me, but thank you
for going to so much trouble explaining why you do it
TL
MC
Charlie Choc
>"John A Schroeder" <j...@srv.net> wrote in message
>news:3863AB3C...@srv.net...
>>
><SNIP>
>
>I fish occasionally, some might say a lot, sometimes I even catch a few. If
>you want to use an "o" then do so, I dont mind at all. It is extremely
>deleterious to distance casting, which was the subject under discussion, and
>brings virtually no advantages in any other circumstances, but if you like
>it, do it. None of the reasons you give are convincing to me, but thank you
>for going to so much trouble explaining why you do it
>
FWIW, I used the 'o' when fishing the saltwater flats and it helped me
(it seemed anyway) better control the line coming off the deck of the
skiff and not have to search for the line when it was time to strip it
in. I can see where it would not be useful in distance casting,
though.
--
Charlie...
W.D.Grey
CON...@t-online.de> writes
>Modern rods are extremely robust, nevertheless constant overloading will
>damage or break them.
I agree Mike, and if my pal was on-line he would confirm that I broke
his 7# weight rod with a WF8 line, double hauling. The rod took the
punishment for about 15 minutes then like a rifle shot it broke.
Take care.
--
Bill
http://www.graigroad.demon.co.uk
Mike Connor
I have seen that happen a few times, and I have repaired quite a few that
broke under such circumstances. Commonest reason for breaking is actually
trying to lift sunken line in one go for a back cast. Strange thing is
people invariably put it down to the rod having a "defect". This is rarely
the case. Stiffer faster rods usually break much more readily than soft
ones as well.
I always do a few boat fishing trips on the Baltic with one of the
commercial boats every year, there are upwards of sixty anglers on some of
these trips, and one always sees a fair few rods breaking because of people
trying to cast heavier pirks than the rod was designed for. Quite a few
of these people also insist that the rod was defective, although this is
also not the case.
TL
MC
W.D.Grey
CON...@t-online.de> writes
>I have seen that happen a few times, and I have repaired quite a few that
>broke under such circumstances. Commonest reason for breaking is actually
>trying to lift sunken line in one go for a back cast. Strange thing is
>people invariably put it down to the rod having a "defect". This is rarely
>the case. Stiffer faster rods usually break much more readily than soft
>ones as well.
For the record, the rod I broke was on the forward cast - probably
aerialised too much line and the rod objected :-(
--
Bill
http://www.graigroad.demon.co.uk
michael roegner
What you're talking about here is something I've observed in
myself over the years. When I start out in the morning, my casting
is usually in the vertical plane, and my wrist is flexed in the same
plane as the rod loads. As the day goes on, however, I begin to use
different muscles to cast. If you hold your hand/arm pointing
directly in front of you, with your thumb pointing straight up, flex
your wrist to move your fingertips vertically a few inches. These are
the muscles (and motion) that I tend to use early in the day. Within
a few hours, however, I find myself actually moving my wrist in a
motion that is more like 30 degrees out of this plane, thus allowing
the much larger muscles on the inside of my forearm to power the cast.
This type of rotation, called pronation, is extremely common, and is a
natural reaction to overexertion. The biggest problem with this is
that most rods are built with the spine at its stiffest when pushing
the power stroke forward during a cast. If you pronate the rod, you
essentially "fall off" the spine of the rod, and the casting
characteristics will change dramatically. You can even get torquing
of the blank, causing premature failure of the blank or ferrules.
When I figured out what was going on, I simply changed my rodbuilding
methods a bit. Nowadays, I align the spine of the blank approx. 30
degrees out of the vertical plane, thus putting it directly in line
with the plane of the cast when I pronate the rod. A second change
I've made is that while most people put the spine of the rod in a
position to "power" the cast forward, I do the reverse. There is
actually substantially more of a demand put on the rod during the
backcast, especially when picking a lot of line/leader up off the
water. Also, from the time I've spent teaching and guiding, I'd have
to say that the one area most people have problems with is their
backcast. Reversing the spine of the rod can make a substantial
difference in their ability to keep the backcast up and in a tight
loop. These simple changes can make a world of difference in
how a rod performs for you. And once you get a rod "tuned in" to your
casting style, you'll never go back to a factory rod again.
Michael Roegner
On Mon, 20 Dec 1999 18:44:17 +1100, "John Knight"
<johnknight...@primus.com.au> wrote:
>
>Mike Connor <MIKE-...@t-online.de> wrote in message
Mike Connor
I found at last to my dismay, that the cast had been pronated,
I built another rod then, this problem having been defined,
and now I cast all day with ease, the rod at last is spined.
Now some may think that is overkill, when really all the gist,
to cast quite well with any rod, just do not bend your wrist,
if the rod and wrist are held quite still, there is then no exertion,
If your wrist don't flex, then it wont tire, no need for more diversion.
If you rotate when you cast a line, you may get in an awful state,
and if you practice faults or build special rods, this may well be your
fate,
use your shoulder and your biceps when you essay a cast,
and you will find you cast all day, and have no pain at last.
Furthermore with such a style, you will cast with strength and skill,
your accuracy and distance will improve, and far more fish you´ll kill
It is not difficult at all to cast, in fact one may do it with a simple
stick
building special rods to tune out faults, is not the most appropriate
casting trick.
Now while I am aware that some thoughts on casting may well vary,
when told that building special rods will work, I tend to become wary,
anyone can learn to cast, with a little thought and preparation,
even those who like myself, don't know shit about pronation.
You will soon know when your castings bad, and when you´ve had enough,
pronation may indeed set in, but worse still is a broke rotator cuff,
best not to believe then all you hear about factory rods not working,
the biggest fault when casting, is simply too much jerking.
Try to keep it smooth and flowing, and strive not at first for distance,
and you can then use any rod or stick or pole or line in this miserable
existence
Take a lesson from a pro, and follow his instructions to the letter,
and practice what he shows you, and you will then cast better.
If you wish to build a special rod, then of course by all means do so,
but don't expect to cast like Kreh, or sing just like Caruso,
Caruso sang just like he did, with control and skill and special intonation
and most efficient casters do the same, although they know sod all about
pronation.
TL
MC
--
"In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the
impossible"
http://www.mikeconnor.de
"michael roegner" <mroe...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:386b975e...@news.mindspring.com...
> John -
michael roegner
FWIW - There is no "correct" way to cast. The mechanics involved in
the casting stroke vary from individual to individual, and unlike
some, I prefer to tailor my tools to best service my needs, rather
than attempting to redefine myself to meet the design criteria by
which someone else created them.
Mike Connor
the mechanics involved in casting in order to obtain maximum efficiency are
known. How some people hold their hands to achieve this may vary, but the
mechanics stay the same.
Pronation is defined as turning ones forearm or wrist, so that the palm of
the hand faces downwards, as when slapping a table top, I fail to see how
this might be of any use or indeed disadvantage, in fact have any relevance
whatever, when casting. There is no reason you or anybody else should not
tailor your tools to suit yourself, but the justification of such tailoring
is suspect when words like "pronation" are used in this connection.
In most cases, where the spine of the rod actually sits when casting, is
immaterial. It may be that the rod has a slightly greater resistance to
bending in a certain plane, but as the casting movement is a direct powered
stroke, this is more or less immaterial. In all casting the line will go
where the rod tip goes, and this is quite independent of anything below that
tip. Whether you use a broomstick or a wet noodle, with or without a spine,
is quite immaterial.
Some torquing of the rod may indeed occur when a definite spine is present,
and not in direct line with the casting stroke, but this will not cause the
rod to twist usually, will be minimal, and will not affect line direction.
The line goes in the direction it is propelled, irrespective of how it is
propelled. On a rod, it is propelled by the tip ring. It will swivel around
the tip ring independent of what happens below. Exactly this occurs, when
you change casting direction in one stroke. If this direction change
actually caused any appreciable torque, then most rods would simply break
when this cast was carried out. They do not do so.
Any large forces caused by torquing would probably cause the blank to
collapse. The walls of the blank are subjected to considerable stress when
bending anyway, forcing them out of the round, and adding any appreciable
torque to this would probably wreck the blank. The only way to apply
torque to a thing like a rod in any appreciable amount, is to fix one end,
and actually twist the other end. The amount of torque possible when casting
a fly-line is extremely minimal, as the friction of the line on the tip ring
is simply insufficient to cause any appreciable twisting. The line simply
swivels round the ring freely.
You can hold a rod any way you like, sideways, at an angle, etc etc, and as
long as the stroke may be satisfactorily performed, the line will follow
that stroke exactly, tracking the rod tip.
In situations where the rod is under heavy stress, when fighting a large
heavy fish for instance, with the rod held in a specific position, a
pronounced spine which is not exactly at the front or exactly at the back of
the rod may indeed cause some torquing. Opinion on this is divided, some
experts preferring the spine at the front, some at the back. All agree
however that it should be one or the other. I have never heard of anybody
intentionally placing the spine of a rod elsewhere, and am not surprised, as
I can see no point whatever in doing so.
The reason for my going into this in such detail, is not a desire to prove
you wrong, but to avoid many people being confused by yet another irrelevant
and complex explanation for something which is really quite simple.
Using any other muscles than the biceps or the shoulder muscles to cast,
will cause strain, and casting faults, which could easily be avoided.
Carrying out physical changes to the rod will not alleviate this in any way
whatsoever. It is possible to cast perfectly well using the wrist, or
forearm, but it is inefficient, and will soon cause casting faults and
eventually pain. The muscles here are not powerful enough to withstand that
sort of treatment for long. The simplest solution is to use the powerful
biceps and shoulder muscles.
Tight lines !
Mike Connor
--
David Parsons
FWIW, I took a tour of the Sage factory and when the butts and tips were
matched, it was done for straightness and looks. I asked about the spine and
was told that they found that the early rod blanks required the spines to be in
the same plane but that they way the blanks were made now, the spine was not
significant. I am sure there will be responses about how stupid this is but I
think the sales record speaks for itself. I also posed the same question to
Dave Whitlock and he essentially said that the spine in the modern graphite rods
was not the factor it was years ago. I suggest everyone do a spine check of
their factory rods, they might be a little surprised.
DP
michael roegner
Let me start this out by acknowledging your contributions to
this group. You clearly invest a great deal of time in your
participation here, and appear to care greatly about both ROFF and
flyfishing in general. You apparently are not, however, quite as much
of an authority in all aspects of flyfishing as you seem to believe.
Spine is a significant factor in modern blanks, and anyone who
cares to test it can do so quite easily by simply picking up a blank
and rotating it while under load. It is somewhat more difficult to
identify in a completed rod, but can usually be recognized there as
well. Modern blanks have NOT improved to the point where they
respond uniformly to loads in all planes - what this amounts to is
that the "action" of the blank will vary substantially depending on
which direction the blank is flexed. This can, and does, affect the
casting characteristics of the rod. What this amounts to is that you
may well be casting a "different" rod for each orientation of the
blank. And the action isn't uniform even within the same plane - as I
stated earlier, my rods tend to have significantly varying loading
characteristics between the backward and forward strokes.
When I speak of torque implications, what I'm speaking of is
the easily demonstrable situation in which the rod will bend under
load more easily in a direction that is not precisely in line with the
stroke. What happens in this case is that the tip will "deflect" by a
certain amount in the direction of the lowest resistance to flexion.
When this occurs it tends to exaggerate the torque generated in the
tip of the rod that is created by the fact that the tip guide is no
centered over the tip of the blank. The cast "falls off" the spine,
and the tip section of the rod especially is placed under an extreme
torque load as you power the rod forward loading it for the forward
cast. Casting techniques such as double hauling can increase the
stresses involved. This leads to an ineffecient casting stroke, and
a less-than-ideal cast, and can even snap the tip off a blank. I've
repaired a number of rods damaged by this scenario, usually very fast
action rods used for distance casting in saltwater. If you've ever
seen a rod where the tip section is broken in a spiral or is
splintered along the length of the blank, rather than being broken
cleanly across the shaft, it is likely to have been caused by this
type of situation. It is significant to note that this problem does
not occur if the spine is either aligned with the plane of the casting
stroke or if it is "removed" from the equation by being rotated a full
90 degrees from the plane of the cast.
On to pronation. I'll repeat what I said in the previous
post, namely that there is no one "correct" way to cast. There is a
substantial amount of variation in body mechanics from individual to
individual, and what works best for one person may not work well at
all for another. In my personal case, I found that when casting for
long periods of time or with heavy saltwater equipment, my own body
tends to rotate (or pronate) my arm such that even though the rod
still travels in the same plane, my forearm, wrist, and elbow flex
along a different line than that which you suggest is the only "right"
way to do it. Is that wrong? Not if it works. And if you'll look
back to the earlier post I was responding to, you'll find that I was
echoing another poster's suggestion that maybe, just maybe, there
might be a casting methodology that works better for some.
Now, I'm far from a championship caster, and I'm a bit out of
practice, but should you care to join me in Virginia sometime I'll be
happy take you out on the river and we'll find out if either of us is
mistaken. Until that time, please share your opinions, but recognize
that they are precisely that. My experiences vary from yours, as do
my opinions, and I recognize that there are few absolutes in our
sport. I'll respect yours if you'll pay me the same courtesy.
Michael
michael roegner
unintentionally deleted his post with a mistaken keystroke.
David -
Yes, I'm aware that in factory rods they frequently fail to
adequately spine the rods prior to building them out. I always
recheck the spine on a blank before building it, and I seldom find the
factory spine indicator on the blank to be correct. It may well be
that they are intended to identify the best ferrule fit, but I usually
work on the ferrules until the fit is perfect before building out the
blank. I suspect the factory rods tend to be built out with an eye to
minimizing the investment of time that is required to take a blank to
a sellable product rather than with the objective of "fine tuning" a
rod for optimal performance. This is precisely why a custom built,
specifically tailored rod can sometimes be a much more asthetically
pleasing, and better performing, tool. All of the small items, such
as spine orientation, grip shape and size, reel weight and placement,
number, size and weight of guides, etc., can add up to a major
difference in the way a rod handles. They can make the difference
between a moderately acceptable rod and one that you absolutely love
to cast.
Now, before someone takes off down the "He's a custom
rodbuilder, and he's just trying to drum up business" spam accusation
path, let me state for the record that I have absolutely NO commercial
interest of any kind in building rods for others at this point in my
life. I do build all my own rods, and I've built quite a number for
others in the past, but I am not now in, and have no plans to enter,
the commercial rod-building marketplace. I do teach the occasional
class in rodbuilding, but it is uncompensated, and done in support of
local shops and/or clubs.
Michael
Mike Connor
TL
MC
--
"In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the
impossible"
http://www.mikeconnor.de
"michael roegner" <mroe...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:386d62c1...@news.mindspring.com...
(SNIP)
Mike Connor
to be an authority on anything at all. Everything I write here is just my
opinion, nobody is obliged to accept it as anything else, they can ignore
it, challenge it, discuss it, or even ridicule it if they so wish.
Charlie Choc
>Just as clarification, the "OK" seemed a bit "bare". I have never claimed
>to be an authority on anything at all. Everything I write here is just my
>opinion, nobody is obliged to accept it as anything else, they can ignore
>it, challenge it, discuss it, or even ridicule it if they so wish.
Not to worry Mike, most blowhards think anyone who expresses an
opinion is claiming to be an authority since that is what they do<g>.
--
Charlie...
Ernie Harrison
award". You can both express yourselves in a grand manner and I was shocked
when I opened your response and saw your reply.
Ernie Harrison
Mike Connor wrote in message <84klut$bqq$2...@news03.btx.dtag.de>...
>OK
>TL
>MC
>
>--
>"In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the
>impossible"
>http://www.mikeconnor.de
michael roegner
"Blowhard?" I don't think I'm guilty of that particular sin,
but I've been wrong before. I'll try to be more circumspect in the
future.
Michael
michael roegner
I'm sorry if I came on too strongly in my last post on this
topic. You've always been pretty reasonable, and I seldom find much
to disagree with in your posts. The problem is that whether it was
your intention or not, you have become a generally accepted authority
figure within the ROFF community, and when you make a statements such
as those you made in your post (i.e. - "Spine is irrelevant, etc."),
there are many who will take that as fact rather than personal
opinion. The problem is exaggerated when you state it in a
declarative way. I do the same thing myself, and I don't always
remember to state things as opinion or observation rather than fact.
I'll try to be more careful in the future.
Michael
On Sat, 1 Jan 2000 12:12:55 +0100, "Mike Connor"
<MIKE-...@t-online.de> wrote:
>Just as clarification, the "OK" seemed a bit "bare". I have never claimed
>to be an authority on anything at all. Everything I write here is just my
>opinion, nobody is obliged to accept it as anything else, they can ignore
>it, challenge it, discuss it, or even ridicule it if they so wish.
>TL
>MC
Mike Connor
No problem. If someone disagrees then I expect them to say so.
TL
MC
"In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the
impossible"
http://www.mikeconnor.de
"michael roegner" <mroe...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:386fb49...@news.mindspring.com...
(SNIP)
Eis
the line will go where the rod tip goes is totally accurate, but if the plan of
the cast is say 30 degrees off from the plane of the spline then the rod tip
will wander out of the plane of the cast. This will cause inaccuracies but only
to a very experienced fisherman who can actually cast to a 6 inch circle at 50
feet.
The torque issue you got very well. The torque is defined by a force and a
moment arm. the moment arm is the deep bend in the rod when fighting a big fish.
So casting where the rod doesn't bend very much will not produce much torque.
Double hauling casters can feal the torque however.
Mike Connor wrote:
> --
Mike Connor
well actually, if you read the post again, I did not say the spine did not
matter at all, or at least that was certainyl not my intention. My chief
objection was in fact to the suggestion that deliberately placing the spine
somewhere other than the back or front of the rod in relation to the casting
plane in order to counter "pronation", would improve casting. It most
definitely will not in my opinion. As you say, a definite spine not in line
with the casting plane of the rod, ( normally either at the front, straight
up through the middle of the guides, or at the back of the rod ), may indeed
cause some sideways deflection of the rod tip when it is loaded, resulting
in inaccuracy under power. This may also occur when the top half of the
blank ( or a section of it ) has the spine in a different plane to the
others. Again as you say, the line will go where the tip goes, but the tip
may wander off line somewhat from the stroke direction, especially during
very powerful casts.
Some types of casting do exert considerable torque on a blank. double spey
casting for instance, in fact many tape the joints to avoid the sections
twisting and coming apart, as they are otherwise liable to do as a result of
torque. The casting action is basically responsible for this here though,
and not the spine of the rod. These rods are indeed often broken because of
this.
For most normal casting this is not a factor. When double hauling or even
with a powerful single haul, one may feel the rod "trying to turn in ones
hand", if the spine is way off, although this is only usually noticeable
when the rod has a very pronounced spine, ( usually a cheap rod ), and then
only on factory rods that have not been spined properly. Some very cheap
blanks with varying wall thickness, or pronounced blemishes, cause similar
effects.
A similar feeling may be experienced under normal conditions when changing
direction in a single cast. By this I mean picking up line which is lying
straight in front of you, and casting it say thirty degrees to the left of
you. The rod will try to turn somewhat in this case as well.
As it is unusual to attempt any great accuracy when double hauling for
distance, I assume not many people would notice this anyway.
Thanks for your comments. It always helps to clarify things for me when I
hear other peoples comments, and wish to formulate a sensible and logical
reply, it forces me to think very carefully indeed about the whole process,
and this invariably then becomes clearer in my mind.
Tight lines !
Mike Connor
--
"In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the
impossible"
http://www.mikeconnor.de
"Eis" <e...@cira.colostate.edu> wrote in message
news:38736D32...@cira.colostate.edu...
Mr. Gink
_____ Well, you surprised me with your comments on spine alignment
Mike. I noticed how it did get you thinking as you wrote it and you did
almost hit every issue regarding it. It is surprising how many graphite
fly rods are not spine aligned in BOTH the butt section AND the tips.
More so here then with bamboo fly rods because most bamboo fly rods are
made by individuals who know better and understand the importance of
aligning their products correctly. It is also easier to aline bamboo
rods. Up until recently, graphite was the only kind of fly rod that was
made on a production line basis. Many times, employees simply do not
take the time to do things correctly after supervisors turn their
backs. How often I've casted graphite fly rods of various brands to
only have the tip come torquing off, I cannot begin to count! I know
you have experienced the same parting of the ways Mike.
What I wanted to add to your original offerings and thoughts, which are
excellent is this. You had stated you think it makes little difference
if the spine is on the top or bottom vertically to the ground. In my
opinion, if a customer tells me that he will be fishing sink tips or
lines, I will put the strong side of the spine on the snake guide side
because I want that fly rod to have a little 'extra heft' to help lift
such lines out of the water. Its not a major consideration but I
consider it anyhow because it is my nature.
If a customer says they want a fly rod that will reach out and touch
someone, I will put the stronger side of the spine of the opposite side
of the snake guides because I want the power stroke forward, along with
the double haul to have a little more kick to it. It may make a
difference of only a foot or two in the scheme of things but I must also
admit I have not made any tests to prove that point yet. Logic and
physics tells me it would make a positive difference.
Perfectly constructed fly rods, both graphite and bamboo can be made
without having any spine at all! This is determined in how accurate the
wall thickness are in graphite and how accurate each segment in a bamboo
are cut. It is not uncommon for us to have half of our fly rods without
any spine at all but NOT in both tip and butt. A tip may have zero
spine and the but a little or the reverse. Sometimes, two or three out
of ten tries, a bamboo fly rod may have zero spine but this is the
exception, not the rule, yet we are doing it.
What this means in casting is exactly what you said Mike. The fly goes
where the tip points, but also - up to a point. There is that torque
thingie again because of the nature of fly lines laying off on one side
of a fly rod's guides and not always being in the center. Its not
enough to worry about because there is a thing called "average constants
of touching," I take into account from time to time.
Now graphite is graphite and more often then not today they are not made
as accurately as bamboo fly rods are. Just plain fact. What I'm saying
here, is all graphite fly rods have to deal with spine corrections in
all sections. Yet, we must check every section of every bamboo to make
sure which has spine and which doesn't and how much. It is a catch 22.
All fly rods need to be checked for spine even though they may sometimes
not have any.
The beauty of a six sided bamboo fly rod is the spines found are always
down one specific flat and all the flats can be marked easier then
with round graphite fly rod. This is a major point because it's easier
to lose the spine point on a round blank then on a six sided plane.
Often, more mistakes occur with graphite then with bamboo fly rods
regarding this placement. Being OFF by only one or two degrees with a
graphite can have serious results in accuracy casting contests. The
more off set the spine is with graphite fly rods the more often they
seem to come apart which results in the taping of joints Mike mentioned.
A final point I would like to add is this. Spining a fly rod properly
in all the sections, whether it is a two, three or four piece fly rod
doesn't mean a thing if the caster does not keep the fly rod aligned in
his hand into the direction of the cast. The guides cannot have the fly
line pulling on the sides by holding the guides so they are also 90
degrees out of plane.
When we are splining rod blanks we match blanks to have the same amount
of spine feel and those that have no spine we match tips with butts
and/or middle sections with three piece fly rods. The reason for this
is one doesn't want a fly rod with spine in the butt and spine in the
tip but a flat, no spined mid-section. We try hard to keep the power
curves of each blank section constant whenever humanly possible.
Again, thanks for a great post Mike.
Mr. G.
--
http://www.gink.com/chat
email: gi...@tds.net
Mike Connor
Tight lines !
Mike Connor
--
"In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the
impossible"
http://www.mikeconnor.de
"Mr. Gink" <gi...@tds.net> wrote in message news:38744504...@tds.net...
<SNIP>
> _____ Well, you surprised me with your comments on spine alignment
> Mike. I noticed how it did get you thinking as you wrote it and you did
<SNIP>
Wolfgang
Eis wrote:
<snip>
I have never paid a great deal of attention to spine in rods. Whether the spine
being off on the side of the rod somewhere might cause sufficient torque to destroy
it under load seems like an important question but it is one I am not qualified to
address. Accurate casting, on the other hand, is something we all take more or less
seriously and have to deal with on a regular basis. That a misaligned spine will
cause the rod tip and thus the line to go somewhere other than intended seems
obvious enough. But it also seems to me that any practiced caster will
automatically compensate for this tendency in a rod without even being aware of it.
I can't recall that I ever noticed a rod putting a line consistently to one side or
the other of the intended target. Surely, even the faintest breeze will have a
greater effect on line placement than a badly misaligned spine, as will the need for
changing one's preferred technique in order to avoid low hanging branches and other
streamside impedimenta. While proper placement of the spine is an interesting
intellectual and manual exercise experience suggests that for the most part it can
safely be ignored in the stream.
michael roegner
You're right - a competent caster can probably compensate for
the problems caused by a misaligned spine in a rod. However, it is
better still to have the rod tuned to ideally suit your casting style
and body mechanics. When everything is right, the casting stroke
feels much more natural, and you don't have to "compensate" for
anything. Which was precisely my point. My casting is somewhat
atypical in that I DO pronate my forearm, and I use the muscles of the
forearm more than is considered traditional. As a result of this, I
build my rods to provide their optimal performance when casting this
way. And Mikey - it really doesn't matter a bit whether you believe
it or not - I do, and that's what counts.
Michael
Mike Connor
you, why not. I just don't think it would work for many other people.
Avoiding use of the wrist and forearm muscles is in my opinion the better
way to go.
While I have considerable experience of people misspelling my family name,
especially living as I do in a foreign country, most of them manage to get
my first name right. All the more surprising in this case as my first name
is identical with yours, "Mike" being simply an abbreviation. Personally I
would feel quite foolish addressing a fifty year old man in the diminutive
in this way, but if it pleases you, be my guest.
Tight lines !
Mike Connor
--
"In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the
impossible"
http://www.mikeconnor.de
"michael roegner" <mroe...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:C3V1OBNbMND0AD...@4ax.com...
Rick Webster
michael roegner wrote:
> Wolfgang (and Mr. Conner) -
>
> <<<Snipped some good comments>>>
> And Mikey - it really doesn't matter a bit whether you believe
> it or not - I do, and that's what counts.
>
> Michael
Michael,
I don't think there is any justification for being so condescending.
Just a thought ;>)
Rick Webster - still learning
Mike
Go back and read a few of Mike Connor's replies to George and a few
others. He has been no better at times.
Regards,
Mike
Mike Connor
well. Or better still, go back and read them all, then you wont need to
bother waiting.
TL
MC
"In order to achieve what is possible, one must constantly attempt the
impossible"
http://www.mikeconnor.de
news:38760E58...@cisnet.com...
ww
persuade me that you might feel the spline in a fly rod is in a word,
bullsh_t. (and yes i do know the missing letter and can only hope and pray
that the punctuation and tense will be close). no reponse to this posting
will be required because i believe it.
fishworship
Hexagen
W.D.Grey <Bi...@graigroad.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>For the record, the rod I broke was on the forward cast - probably
>aerialised too much line and the rod objected :-(
>Bill
>http://www.graigroad.demon.co.uk
that's it Bill, unlike the makeup in modern skis...flyrods are a bit
delicate to shove different materials into (as yet) to perform differing
tasks....
tight_lines,
steve