|
Walter & jGroup...
[GH] We have gone beyond our topic of general discussion and comments on the exams. For that reason, I have placed Peter Morse's message, "Thoughts on exams" in an attachment.
The second attachment contains a request from Molly Semenik.
Now, back to TASK 1. :
[GH] From Ckling Ling,
Hi Gordy,
Are you expected to go straight into 8 ft wide loop from pick up or can you false cast normal size loops and then start to vary the size of the loops?
Cheers
Ling
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Ling. I have interpreted the wording, "...starting by casting wide loops, ......", literally.
My take is that a Master ought to exercise loop control even with the first back cast with the pickup.
Some on the MCI Testing Committee might see that differently. If so, we'll probably hear .
Those of you whom I've examined will perhaps recall that I added something to this task to further test your expertise. I had you form different size loops between the forward and back casts. (Narrow on the forward cast and wide on the back cast and vice-versa.) Of course, since that is not specified as a requirement, I could not have flunked a candidate on that basis.
Gordy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Bob Hansell comes in with an, "Am I ready" ?" point of view :
Gordy,
As I prepare for the task I anticipate I would need to;
This is not from the tester's "what am I looking for" point of view, but from the candidates "am I ready" point of view
Am I thinking correctly?
Thanks,
Bob
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Bob,
In my view, you are on target.
I'd add :
- Demonstrate loop control in such a manner that the loops can easily be seen by students.
- Be prepared to have the examiners take the position of a student in asking you to teach the task. I'd suggest that you do it just as you probably have done it many times as you have been teaching. Attention to details such as how you position yourself with respect to the sun and wind direction is a good idea.
If you have been asked to actually teach it that way, remember: Your demo and explanation must match. Also, your demo. is only part of teaching. When actually teaching, the sooner you place your rod in your student's hand, the better.
Your examiner, may even play the part of a poor student who "isn't getting it" to test your ability to handle that situation.
A Master candidate who has already logged many hours of teaching will have no trouble with that. One who has not had that experience will likely stumble. A good way of, "separating the sheep from the goats."
G.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] From Guy Manning. My brief return comments in text in italics . Guy brings up some interesting points :
>From discussion 1.
Gordy writes: There has been discussion as to whether this use of the vertical rod plane (casting plane) constitutes a demand for a particular casting style. I suppose this can be considered a "teaching style" for this particular task.
In which case they are demanding that we teach within a given style. Though I do agree that an upright or nearly upright planes is better for teaching.
Gordy writes: I've found that almost all casters form better back cast loops when they can watch them. I asked Floyd Franke about that for MCI exam purposes. His response, "If you don't watch them, THEY will." (Referring to the examiners)
It isn't that simple, however. Especially since this task is expected to be accomplished with ease and expertise which might be sullied by the candidate looking back. In addition, while it is easy to gracefully observe one's back cast loops when casting in an off vertical plane, it is awkward for most to do it when casting vertically. Joan Wulff is an exception. As a lithe former dancer, she can do it with utmost grace and ease ... sheer poetry in motion. I can't come close.
For short casts, those that don’t require a double haul, I see no reason to watch the back cast unless on the water and looking for obstructions. Even then I see no reason to watch them all unless in a casting tournament. I particularly see less reason to watch it during a test casting to only 45-50 feet. To me it demonstrates a lack of confidence in your casting. Aside from the body rotation that most beginners will fall into, the fact that a beginner is taught to watch the cast takes their focus away from the target, placing a bad habit in front of the ability to be accurate.
[GH] Yes. That's what I meant by it appearing awkward. A good idea to practice by watching the back cast until you get reasonably good at it; then practice without looking back. Have someone else critique the back casts. Tom White did that for me as he mentored me. My comment about Floyd Franke actually referred to the distance cast. Not task 1. . I should have made that clear.
In regards to the distance. Traditionally it has been measured from the casters toes to the fly, or better yet a baseline from which they cast to the fly. That is what we on the West Coast were taught by Alan Rohrer in the opening days of the CICP. I bring a 3X5 foot mat and place it on the grass with a 100 foot tape running out from the front edge. The front edge of the mat is the line. Otherwise the candidate could move forward during a test and insist the distance was made to a pre-placed marker when the actual cast was short.
[GH] I sometimes use a damp towel on the ground in front of the caster. I have not been actually measuring the distance other than using targets set up over a long tape.
How did the MCI committee resolve the measurement of loop size? At what point in time and at which point along the loop do we judge the height of the loop? What if they cast off vertical and at what degree does it become off vertical? Do we take the dip in the lower leg caused by counter flex into account. That may not be important here but it could easily become an issue in the distance casts. It is for these reasons that I am more concerned with loop shape than actual loop height. The leading edge tell me if the cast will turn over or not and how efficient it will be against a wind.
>From discussion 2.
Gordy writes: I know that, although not stated on this task description, most examiners prefer that the forward and back cast loops match one another. Not a good idea to form a nice tight loop on the forward cast and a wide one on the back cast . That would make it even more advisable for the caster to be able to see the loops in each direction.... to be sure to match them well. I'd prefer to see them matched with respect to size, loop leg alignment, and timing. (Provided there is no significant wind to deal with.)
Seems obvious, but I'd best note that the examiners will be judging those loops on BO'TH the forward and back casts. I've tested candidates who thought that they were only interested in the forward loops. Big mistake !
BOG and MCI committee member Joe Libeu did a presentation/survey a couple years at the NCCFFF conclave. In attendance were Al Kyte BOGE, Joe Libeu BOG, Bob Middo ex-BOG, George Revel MCI, Eric Sherar MCI, a few CI’s and I. None of us had consistently sized loops between the forward and back casts for 45 foot casts. A point was made to Joe about this who was already aware of it and agreed it was an issue. I should also point out that this is borne out by the Casting Analyzer that shows few casters are consistent in the front and the back. The Rajeff brothers are notable exceptions. Mel Krieger would not have been an exception, he was the first to point out his own faults.
[GH] Frankly, mine are not perfectly matched, either .... even when I try to have them match. I don't have gross inconsistencies, however, (unless having a bad casting day). You're right about the CA findings.
I'd not be impressed, however, if the candidate made nice small loops on the forward casts coupled with back cast loops the size of a minibus.
Guy Manning
|
Attachment:
Thoughts on exams..rtf
Description: RTF file
Attachment:
GH.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document