|
[GH] From Gary Eaton :
Gordy,
I have a few points to express-
Is there anyone who truly believes that concave tip path is NOT the fundamental cause of tailing loops, regardless of what the caster does to generate concavity?
I find this to be one of the great enlightenment's of modern casting theory and applaud Jay and Bill Gammel for making it a central part of the FFF formulae. Every other model I have seen boils down to this fundamental component across all tails.
Various descriptions explain the problem, other than concave tip path, with tailing loops. These include -
- Not enough arc for the amount of line out the rod tip (carry).
- Too short a tip path for the amount of bend in the rod.
How do these two descriptions become concave tip path? This is the role of the instructor to dissect these broader comments into the concave tip path. At the keeping it simple level, the concave tip path remains the common thread. We have seen myriad permutations of how the caster creates them, but they are all concave tip path at their most basic flaw.
The esteemed Lefty Kreh, usually applies the "fix" for tailing loops as some version of "dip the rod tip down at the end" or "point the thumb horizontal", etc. I have never seen, nor heard him teach anything supporting the concave path of the rod tip having the primary role in causing tailing loops.
The tip drop seems a mere "band-aid" that merely covers-up the casting flaw and solves none of the fundamental casting mechanics issues. Further, it hampers the potential to tighten loops with wider-than-necessary arc. The exception being that the increased arc resolves too-short-a-casting-arc cause of concave tip path. This would not appreciably aid the creep -> early-power-impulse (mis-application-of-power subsets) cause of concave tip path that represents the most-common source of tails.
Given the excellent high-speed and motion-capture video that remove all doubt on the concave tip path as the fundamental cause of tailing loops, how can we resolve these discrepancies? The obvious nature of this appeared in my old VHS tapes using the crude "Sport Mode" ten years ago. I recommend seeing Carl McNeil's recent DVD Casts that Catch Fish, in which a fine overview of the five essentials appears, expertly demonstrated and described.
I hate to recommend a Lefty Kreh book and then say, "but ignore pages 30x to 3xx" and "see the images on pages 2xx and 4xx prove inaccuracies in the text", etc. My approach is to not recommend and even caution that some of the concepts will impede passing an FFF exam. (Would we really pass someone who told us the cause of tailing loops was "not dipping the rod tip down after the loop is formed"? - or- that "starting with the elbow high and ending with the elbow low causes tailing loops" when we can all cast this way absent tailing loops with proper delay of rotation and smooth acceleration - because that rod movement prevents a concave tip path? )
We have had this exchange before in December of 2008 ( Lefty's Book - Tailing loops 12/22/2008). Now that I am examining candidates more, I must tolerate less of the MCI prep activities that might allow substituting these patently incorrect simplifications and inaccurate mechanics from displacing Gammels' more fundamentally accurate concave rod tip path model. The Gammel model simply develops no true exceptions, making it a best answer.
Likewise, I cannot work-around Mac Brown's observational assertion, in Casting Angles -1997, that side-arm delivery produces faster loop speeds than overhead p129). I suspect that longer tip travel is the real issue and not casting plane.(If a candidate were to assert that side-arm plane generates faster loop speeds, he better be prepared to explain why, in detail far more clear than Mac's narrative.) I also experience his box exercises on pp 97-107 as often not focusing on the proper variables - (adequate rotation) and other times actually proving the Gammels' model by showing examples that are actually concave tip paths rather than arm position - (see "Q" vs "R" on p 100 that I believe represent opposite of most MCI experiences) - though Mac wisely inserts the saving principle of minimal arc, which I can then convert to concave tip-path. Lefty does not exhibit such breadth of rationale.
The bigger issue here is, that sometimes people use their MCI certification, or other ascribed expertise, to tout stuff as fact, (beyond our usual convenient-contractions to get a certain result in a lesson), and never have to validate invented concepts.
Similarly, nothing in maintenance of certification or re-certification creates an expectation to update dis proven concepts.
Though this may seem be a bit off-topic, it remains critical information for the candidate approaching an exam. Boiled-down, don't assert a theory which you cannot explain or do not endorse when answering a question. Do not try to answer a concept that you do not have experience with. "I don't know" remains a much better answer than gibberish that argues some version of "I am wrong" - providing that "I don't know" does not arise too frequently or on simpler issues.
Gary Eaton
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Gary,
We can debate the correctness of the touted mechanisms and theories behind the various ways to accomplish the tailing loop for a long time as we have done in the past.
While it does appear to me that for the vast majority of tails we have a concave rod tip path produced in multiple ways, I don't see that the concave tip path is the absolute sine qua non of the tail. One example is the tail produced by casting in a single casting plane for both back cast and forward cast the line planes (trajectories) of which form an angle with one another of less than 180 degrees. (High back cast followed by high foreword cast).
You are challenging the Task 19 wording, as I understand it, because it calls for the causes and corrections for tailing loops. You see the cause as the concave rod tip path. You may remember I did the same a while back and was correctly criticized for that.
Now one might ask, "Then what is the cause of this concave rod tip path ?" That is when we get into discussions of altered applications of power and insufficient casting arc relative to the amount of line carried as being primary or the proximate result of creep.
As I see it, when making tails by using too little casting arc for the amount of line I carry, the concave rod tip path actually seems to result from my use of power sufficient to keep my line aloft. This, then, boils down to a secondary power application problem. From our testing committee discussions, I know that not all agree with this.
I feel that Lefty's books have so much more to offer that I heartily recommend them despite the fact that many take issue with his concept of tailing loop formation and "cure". Hard to argue with the fact that whether a "bandaid" or not, his simple way of correcting this is swift / direct teaching which works for many. Competent MCI candidates are aware of these differences of opinion and are able to discuss them in a way which need not adversely affect their test outcomes.
Lefty is fully aware of these differences of opinion. When he first came out with his 2008 book, he sent me a copy with a request to get back to him with anything I disagreed upon. I did just that. This was followed by very productive dialogue.
If I failed to recommend almost any book because of one or two things with which I disagreed, there wouldn't be much remaining in my recommended reading list. I guess I'd have to start by eliminating Joan Wulff's books because she defines hauling differently than most authors and instructors around the World. As you well know, it speaks to the difference between education by weighing different opinions and outcomes and slavic adherence to dogma.
Re your take on Mac Brown's text : For me, and some others who use a modification of the "side arm delivery" as a default cast, our loop speeds are faster when done that way under most conditions. That is partly because this style is better suited to my body..... especially when using relatively heavy salt water tackle. Same with many others. Speaks to elements of style as being, "different strokes for different folks" which can, in the end, yield comparable results.
As with each of us, there are times when I'm asked a question and have to answer with a qualified, "I don't know".
Gordy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|