[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
  • Thread Index
  • Date Index
  • Subject Index

    • FW: Re: What do you feel or sense at the end of the casting stroke?

    Jeff...

    I agree that teaching the concept of a STOP remains the best way to teach fly casting....particularly for distance as well as loop control.  This is true, in my opinion, despite the sophisticated physics findings which we've discussed.

                                                                   Gordy




     

    From: Jeff Wagner <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
    To: Ssadik1@xxxxxxx
    CC: hillshead@xxxxxxx
    Subject: Re: What do you feel or sense at the end of the casting stroke?
    Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 19:22:51 -0600
    Server,

I hope that are doing well it has been some time since we have talked!

I would like to add a few thoughts if you dont mind.
    First, as was mentioned and many agreed on the FFFCCI board, the "stop" is not 
    what is effectively happening in casting.  It IS a rapid deceleration.
This IS
effective in casting, and not everyone believes that the stop offers
nothing to
the cast.  When I use the term stop above I mean the stop of the hand, not
necessarily of the rod tip (which we all understand is not an instaneous
ceasing of movement, but an effort to do so that results in a rapid
deceleration).  I do believe this is an effective term to use when teaching
because it offers the student a word they can associate with very easily and
can quickly grasp in their mind.  I would say that most terms we use that
    describe the parts of the stroke need to be short enough and easily understand 
    so that they can be portrayed by the caster upon the motion while performing
    the act of casting. This helps people to understand the stroke. If I do not 
    use the term stop a student will cotninue to move the rod, or move the rod
further than is necessary.  I prefer this word also because it can be
    manipulated from that point to help the caster understand a quicker stop, or a 
    less abrupt or hard stop.

The purpose of the stop as has been outlined is great indeed.  While it
may only
    add slight energy to the cast. It does help to form the loop, the loop shape 
    and loop direction.  If the rod continued to move a loop would not form.
    Understand that from a physics only understanding of the term it may not have application to you. However, being that most of our students are not physics majors or to go one step further have had very little physics. Thye will not 
    understand physics jargon.

I can say without question I will continue to use the term.  It is
effective and
has been for sometime.  I do agree that as we learn more we may find
that it has
less to do with the cast than was thought.  But, I do think that it has
more to
do with the cast in the total scope of the fly cast than you are giving it
credit.  I belive that it is Mr. Richards that offers a percentage of the
energy in the cast attributed from an attempt to solidly stop the fly rod.
    Also, I think that we can attribute an attempt to solidly stop the rod to the 
    casts of some very accomplished casters.  They have made a very conscious
effort to stop the rod more crisply.  Thus giving them higher energy in the
cast, more directed loops and greater efficiency.  I think that the Rajeffs
would be a good example of this.
    Also, I would be interested to know of a cast that can be made without a rapid 
    decerlation of the castin hand.  I offer this because I have yet to see an
    example of this. This may be a relative way of quantifying things. But lets 
    say you have 300 degrees per second of rotation.  I would say that not
having a
stop (rapid deceleration) would mean this would continue or at least at
a slower
rate.  Which is impossible from a physiological standpoint of the
caster and has
almost zero practicality and attributes nothing to efficiency.

Anyway that is the way I interpret the information.

--
Jeff Wagner

Master Certified Fly Casting Instructor, Federation of Fly Fishers
Fly Fishing Buyer, Jax Outdoor Gear
Fly Fishing Guide, Jax Outdoor Gear
Redington Pro Staff
970-481-5887
jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.dhflyfishing.com


Quoting Ssadik1@xxxxxxx:


    Walter/Gordy
    I tried annotating Walter's message below. It's nice to see the effort going 
    into subjecting the foundations of casting to a more rigorous scientific
    standard -- keep it up Walter and Gordy. Just a little volley shot to Gordy - I noticed that you joined the chorus on FFFCCI about teaching "hard stops". The level of scientific//logical rigor there is again dropping. If you (or any one else) want to convince me there is any value to teaching "hard stop" you have to address//put a rational argument together for what the benefit is (and it 
    will also be necessary at some point to refine the definition of hard stop
    because now it has evolved into a moving target). I can tell you right now that 
    the field of Physics will offer nothing to back up a benefit stemming from
    purposefully stopping the rod. Personally I have wiped the slate clean, do not 
    use "hard stop" to describe anything (except as a crude signature for a
    specific cast I call the baseline cast (term is not original with me - Jason as far as I know would be a logical place to put credit)), explain the real mechanics 
    of casting as I practice it, and have students demonstrate (with my
assistance) for themselves how it works.

By the way, Walter, I like the term "kickback" - I'm tempted to call it the
"Harral kickback" in the future out of nostalgia.


From: WALTER/SUE SIMBIRSKI [simbirsw@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 10:16 AM
To: Ssadik1@xxxxxxx
Cc: Gordon Hill
Subject: Re: What do you feel or sense at the end of the casting stroke?
    Server - Now that I've been educated/convinced that this is a real affect and have had a chance to think about it I just wanted to run a couple of thoughts 
    by you.
    The amount of kickback is dependent on rod stiffness and the opposite of what 
    we would call smoothness, i.e., the stiffer the rod the less the kickback,
and the smoother the casting motion the less the kickback.  #Yes, generally
    true. When lecturing/demonstrating I try to teach phases of casts. The first phase is a hand relocation and preload phase. This phase should be smooth -- 
    i.e., this means rod loading gradually increases and actually never becomes
    large, ONLY BECOMING LARGE DURING THE ACTUAL CAST. Also about the kick-back, the 
    harder you push the rod or the more you rotate the wrist in this phase the
    higher the kickback. Of course if you are trying to achieve kickback, then use 
    energy but this is not part of a baseline cast.  Also incidentally for a
    baseline cast the wrist must stay "poised" - that is no wrist rotation in phase 1 and 
    the wrist stays locked and loaded for the "cast".#

Loading a rod effectively makes it stiffer, i.e. the more you bend it the
    more force is required to bend it farther, so a loaded rod will kick back less. 
    #It is more difficult to send the tip backward on a preloaded rod and of
course most times when the rod is preloaded it is already moving (sometimes
    referred to as an initial velocity - remember the simple ordinary differential equations you studied and the role of initial conditions) which can preclude any possibility of sending the tip backward.# In a smooth, "baseline" cast the caster 
    goes through a loading move with a smooth translation to the power snap so
the kickback doesn't occur or isn't an issue.  #YES.#

If the rod isn't loaded at the start of the power snap then kickback can
    occur. There would be two manifestations on the line when this happens -- the first, and most common, is a concave path of the rod tip resulting in a tailing loop. This would happen whenever the casting stroke is too short such as when 
    creep has entered the system and the caster has the option of a power snap
    without a loading move or running out of arm before achieving full acceleration. 
    YES, THAT'S TRUE.  HOWEVER WHAT I SEE WITH EXPERIENCED CASTERS IS PHENOMENA
    WHERE THE ROD IS LOADED INADVERTENTLY BY THIS "KICKBACK" THEN RAPIDLY followed by 
    natural rod unloading THEN AN ATTEMPT IS MADE TO MAKE A NORMAL CAST AND THE
    RESULTS DEPEND ON THE DETAILS OF HOW SKILLED THE CASTER IS. THE TYPICAL M.O. IS 
    FOR THE CASTER TO HAVE 20 OR MORE YEARS OF EXPERIENCE AND ESSENTIALLY BE
    DOOMED TO CAST THIS WAY FOREVER. IN THE PAST I JUST LUMPED THIS INTO THE CATEGORY 
    OF "OVERPOWERING" BUT UNDERSTANDING IT IN TERMS OF "KICKBACK" AND SLACK
    GENERATION AND SLAPPING IS MUCH BETTER AND LEADS DIRECTLY TO SOLUTIONS. RECENTLY I WATCHED ANOTHER INSTRUCTOR FRIEND THAT I ENCOURAGED TO HELP A VERY EXPERIENCED CASTER WITH HIS PROBLEM COMPLETELY MISDIAGNOSE AND MISLEAD THE STUDENT. NOT 
    WANTING TO OFFEND MY FRIEND I STAYED QUIET BUT HOPEFULLY I'LL RUN INTO THE
STUDENT SOMEWHERE DOWN THE ROAD AND FIX HIS PROBLEM ONCE AND FOR ALL.

The second would be when the caster does make a full casting stroke but the
loading move fails to load the rod fully due to slack in the line.
This results in shock waves in the rod #(I THINK YOU MEAN TOP LEG)# leg of
    the line because the rod tip path is more complicated than just a simple concave 
    path. In this case the rod tip kicks back and would then accelerates faster
than expected because the full momentum in the line is not there to hold it
back. When the line was jerked tight the rod would actually rebound in mid
    casting stroke and then rebound again at the end of the stroke. Exactly the same tip 
    movement as when a wiggle cast is performed but applied during the cast
    rather than as a mend. We would see this happen whenever the caster pauses too long 
    at the end of the casting stroke allowing the line to sag, i.e. generate
    slack. This casting fault is described in "Troubleshooting the Cast" by Jaworowski 
    but he doesn't have the complete description of the rod action in this case
(i.e. the kickback isn't part of the analysis). Because of this most people
    expect to see a tailing loop in this case rather than shock waves. THIS MAKES SENSE ALSO - UNFORTUNATELY YOU USE A REFERENCE THAT I AM CRITICAL OF BECAUSE I HAVE FOUND LITTLE IN IT THAT IS CORRECT AND USE IT MERELY TO HAVE PICTURES OF 
    CASTS.  IF THE CASTER IMPLEMENTS A PHASE 1 FOR THE CAST THEN SLACK WILL
    NORMALLY BE REMOVED BECAUSE THERE IS PROBABLY 4 FEET OF TIP MOVEMENT ASSOCIATED IN MOVING THE HAND FROM ONE CASTING POSITION TO THE NEXT - YOU DON'T EVEN NEED MUCH LOOP INTEGRITY TO ACHIEVE THIS FOR A NOMINAL LENGTH OF LINE. IF YOU GENERATE 
    KICKBACK THE SLACK IS AT THE WORST PLACE - NEXT TO THE TIP OF THE ROD.
    Different from THE STANDARD NOTION OF SLACK WITH WEAK LOOPS, ETC., WHERE IT IS 
    DISTRIBUTED OVER THE LINE OR CONCENTRATED TOWARD THE TIP.
    Does this make sense? - YOU MADE GREAT SENSE AND I HOPE THE EMBELLISHMENTS GO 
    TOWARD EXPANDING ON THE DETAILS - For myself now that I can see this pretty
    clearly I will be looking for it on a more regular basis. Several people that I 
    either fish with or know fairly well or prototypes for kickbacks,
    particularly for their delivery cast where the adrenaline is high. - Server 
    
Thanks

Walter

----- Original Message -----
From: Ssadik1@xxxxxxx
Date: Wednesday, April 5, 2006 8:16 pm
Subject: Re: What do you feel or sense at the end of the casting stroke?


    Do it with an unstrung rod and if that's all you're seeing snap a
little harder with your wrist. Same type of motion you would use when
making your a real cast except you have to start from rest (no
creeping forward). A couple of feet isn't to much too ask for with
this move -- just be sure you are achieving some significant rod
deflections in the process of the wrist snap.