|
Walter & Group...
>From Ally Gowans,
Hi Gordy,
Your comments offer sage advice to those who may not see the relevance of the detailed analysis.
The fundamental teaching “rules” are not contradicted by the physics. Here are the ones that I use:
1. Organise the line (cast starts when the fly moves).
2. Accelerate the line then stop.
3. Line follows the rod tip.
And two additional principles:
4. Line and stroke length are proportional.
5. 180 degree principle.
In my case a closer look at how casting works was instigated because some of the statements being made about casting did not ring true and similarly I guess that is why others have engaged with this matter. I have no qualms with the tried and tested teaching “rules” or other methods that help us to communicate with students. I am concerned that statements about the physics of fly casting are as factual as possible because that forms the basis on which we analyse how we cast a fly line (not a fly rod!).
Best wishes,
Ally Gowans
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From Jeff Wagner,
Gordy, I fully appreciate and agree with your synopsis and advice. I really enjoy reading Mr. Sadik's information and even talking with him at past conclaves. The information has helped me mold my own teaching style. for example I have taught for years that the stop is not actually a true stop but a rapid deceleration or negative acceleration. This makes sense to some but to others it is just easier to say stop. Its not that we are lying or giving bad information but laying a foundation for future teaching. If I begin a student teaching them how to stop and teach them into the next level I may then explain that the stop is a great word picture to help students. But, in a more physics sense of the word this is what is happening ..... and go on to explain.
THis brings up a very elementary but fundamental principal in teaching. 'Know who your audience is'. Do that and you will know what information to present and how. If they are rank beginners teach to that level. However, if they are more advanced then teach that way. On several occasions I have given casting lessons to the University of Wyoming Civil Engineering staff, of course their understanding of these principles is probably far greater than mine will ever be, however knowing the type of information that Server has presented helped me to relate the principles of fly casting to this unique audience.
In short I look forward to seeing you all at the conclave and still have a few spots open for my Distance Casting Workshop should anyone want to attend. We will certainly look at some of these topics in relation to casting through a variety of distances and more importantly how to pursue that through your body type and biomechanics.
Thanks,
Jeff Wagner
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] I'm sure most of you know Jeff Wagner as an FFF BOG as well as an accomplished competition distance caster.
Some of you have taken his distance casting Workshop in the past.
I'm amazed that he still has some spots available.
For any of you who want to improve distance technique, this is an opportunity not to be missed !!
Gordy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From Rick Brown,
Gordy, I understand that I speak from a very low podium. I am not even a CI, certainly not an engineer or mathematician. I am just a good 'ol arts and sciences guy who loves fly fishing, casting and spreading the word.
But...If I were enrolling in a physics class I would not expect the professor to begin the first day of class with Einstein's Theory of Relativity, on the other hand, I would expect the prof to have a good grasp of that information and be pretty cutting edge on the knowledge of physics as a whole.
You cannot advance knowledge by breaking information and opinion down to the lowest common denominator. I may not have understood a lot of the complicated information but I have enjoyed every bit of it and appreciate all the work that went into it.
Rick
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From Bruce Richards,
Hi Gordy, just a couple comments.
First, Noel and I examined one cast and showed that, for that cast, rod bend accounted for about 50% of tip speed. In other casts it could be much less, or possibly much more, depending on many variables. Some thought we were applying that 50% figure to all casts. We did not do an extensive study, just responded to a nagging question about how much tip speed might be due to rod bend.
Also, there will always be some rod rotation during unload, we cannot prevent that, we aren't strong enough, or fast enough to stop the rod dead. However, the less rotation there is during unload (stop) the tighter the loop will be. Less rotation during unload is a "hard stop", and the rod won't do that by itself. We can very accurately measure the rate of deceleration with the CA and very clearly show dramatic differences when comparing average casters with experts.
Bruce
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Bruce...
I'm well aware of that.
Of course, no two human beings will have the same nerve/muscle reaction time. The time of relaxation of the agonist muscles of the arm (the ones making the cast) and the activation of the antagonist muscles (the ones decelerating the rod to a stop) is not sufficient to allow any caster to make a true "brick wall stop". The best casters with the tightest loops do come closest.
Just as well.... for if we really could make "brick wall stops" we'd have the rod vibrating and the layouts erratic.
Gordy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[BR] Very true, Noel and I learned all about that when trying to program our robot to cast. We were able to make MUCH harder stops with the robot and without some continuing rotation after the stop is initiated the shock of the counterflex/rebound was enough to throw so much slack into the line that continued casting wasn't possible.
Bruce
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From Gary Meyer,
Gordy,
I always look forward to reading Server’s insights. He often validates and explains concepts that I only vaguely suspect. I do not teach beginners to this detail however, but I avoid teaching the “hard stop” too – at least with intermediate or above students.
As a chemist I have no problem with this apparent dichotomy. After my first year of chemistry classes, which required a lot of serious study on my part, I was furious when, in my first lecture in “P-chem” (physical chemistry), the professor blatantly stated “ All that stuff you have learned about how an atom is structured, with the electrons orbiting around the nucleus, was wrong – it’s just a simple model for beginning students. Here is how things really work.”
The simple model (sometimes referred to as the Bohr atom) is still taught today in all chemistry classes up to the advanced levels. It “works”. Quantum mechanics (the advanced model) works too, of course, and is more precise – but the calculations involved are significantly tougher… and seldom necessary (at least so far in my career as a simple bench chemist).
Gammel’s Five Essentials, as a simple model, works, as does teaching “the stop”; Server’s advanced model is probably more accurate, but not necessarily a better tool for teaching beginning students.. and someday someone will probably point out how both models are inadequate. Such is science, and apparently, teaching fly casting!
Gary Meyer
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Things do change. When i look back 50 years to the things I was taught in medicine and surgery as "the way it is" and see how many of those things no longer apply, it is humbling.
Back then, who knew that an electron could suddenly leap from one orbit to another !
Gordy
|