|
Walter & Group...
[GH] From Ed Jaworowski. Some interesting concepts to consider, here, from one of the most efficient fly casters with whom I've ever spent time casting. Ed is not only a great teacher and caster, but he had the capacity to amaze Bob Andreae and me during an entire day of mangrove shoreline and pocket presentations from a flats skiff at Chokoloskee, Florida.
Ed's concept of when the loop actually begins to form is food for thought ! :
Gordy,
I found the article to which you refer, entitled, as you so accurately recall, "Forget the Drift". It's in the October/November 2007 edition of Saltwater Fly Fishing. Don't know why it isn't on my Archive or Backup Drives. Thanks for reminding me. I'll scan it and add it to my e-files. *
Here is the gist of the article, with some additional thoughts, things I've gleaned from subjecting them to the scrutiny of a physicist, several groups of engineers, kinesiologists from two universities, and verified from working with thousands of people. And I do question the following every day of my life. Thus far, I get only confirmation.
Aside from some select condition that might require drifting, it's generally poor technique. It reveals an inefficient backcast. I've often asked casters why they "drift". The answer is always the same, "So I can make a longer stroke forward." The obvious contradiction eludes them: if a longer stroke is desirable, why not use it on the back cast as well? The only reply I get is, "If I go all the way back the line will go down and hit the water behind me", to which I opine, "Wrong again. That will only happen if you persist in casting with the rod always traveling vertically, which compels the tip to go downward on the back cast." That's physically taxing, awkward, and mechanically inefficient. Taking the rod off to the side for longer casts is far more comfortable, more natural, places less strain on the joints, improves the forward trajectory, is less restrictive, makes longer back casts possible, and requires much less effort. As the intended cast length increases, by increasing the length of the back cast stroke, you get a more efficient back cast and set yourself up for an easier and more efficient forward cast. I had a physicist observe me and he pointed out that because of my arm/body movement, my muscles have a constant output, whether for 30' or 80' casts. He told me, "You never cast harder, you always cast smarter."
I have had it verified by the physicist that if the rod and line were at 90 degrees at the start of the cast, this would be, mechanically, the least efficient position. Obviously it is sufficient for short strokes; it's wholly inefficient for longer casts. As the angle widens---I have dubbed this the "critical angle" in my teaching and writing---the load moves progressively lower into the rod. Ideally, if the rod and line were in a straight line, i.e. 180 degrees, you get the deepest load in the rod with the least effort. As soon as the hand moves forward and begins to rotate, the loop actually forms in the butt of the rod. Contrary to popular wisdom, the loop isn't created when the rod straightens. It's already in the flexed/loaded rod, as it is in a baseball bat, golf club or tennis racquet. It's hard to perceive it in these rather rigid materials, but a rod, being tapered, progressively flexes more toward the tip, then merely transfers the energy into the infinitely more flexible line and reveals the loop we recognize in the unrolling line. I have all my students participate in a demonstration to verify this. They are amazed and quickly understand how and why they can make longer casts, without casting harder.
I don't care what tournament casters do. Absolute distance or the number of times they hit a hoop are their standards. With inordinate strength, timing, coordination, and athleticism they can do amazing things. How hard they cast, how much effort they use, are not factored in. The fact remains that when teaching older people, the majority of women, young folks, people of slight build, professionals who maybe will fish one day a month, etc. it's a different story. Their reaction to taking the rod off the vertical and increasing the back cast, and consequently automatically the forward cast, is always the same: "This is so much easier." No exceptions to that. While working with a tournament caster, he remarked that we should get "the stroke" (as if it were a constant) and continually go harder and harder, as he put it, "To see how much you can put into the cast." Conversely, my watchword is efficiency, defined as the least amount of energy you can use for any given cast. That's why I insist on my students using only one back cast, no false casting, unless absolutely necessary. To me, excessive false casting is the first indication of poor technique. I recently gave a one-hour demonstration and someone remarked, "You never made one false cast", to which I replied, "And?"
We haven't written the last word on this, merely rewritten the first word.
Ed
* FORGET THE DRIFT, by Ed Jaworowski, SALT WATER FLY FISHING magazine, Oct./Nov. issue, 1997
|