Overhang with wind / Clarification of statement

Good stuff, Al and Gordy. I agree, my time with Lefty improved my overall casting more than any other casting expert. I only have one significant point of disagreement, and that is the very first point. “Upward travel” of the rod tip, in and of itself will NOT cause a tailing loop. Take this example. If I make a low backcast, and the flyline is very near the ground when I begin my forward stroke, and then I cast with a perfect SLP to a high stop in the front, then the loop will be perfect, and inclined above the horizontal. Al, you’ll remember my “Connect the Dots” game that I have the students play? This is one of the trajectories that I demonstrate and have the students play with to gain confidence in their SLPs. I also use it to illustrate the rule of 180.

I know what Lefty is intending on this, but the statement as written below is just plain wrong. And our students will probably take it at face value and be confused…

Regards -- TAM

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Comment: Troy is correct. This does give the impression that by, "upward travel" of the rod tip we mean trajectory, launch angle, or the angle at which we direct our cast. This is NOT what Lefty meant.

To put it crudely, if you shove the rod tip up in the direction of the oncoming line at the end of the cast, you may get a tail or a collision with the rod tip no matter what your trajectory might be.

This is what some candidates did to produce a tail on exams. I pointed out that this is not what the examiner is looking for.

Gordy

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From Guy Manning....

Gordy,

You write:

CANDIDATE WILL BE ASKED TO EXPLAIN AND DEMONSTRATE 3 DIFFERENT METHODS OF MAKING A TAILING LOOP SUCH AS:

1. USING TOO SHORT A STROKE FOR THE AMOUNT OF LINE CARRIED,

2. CREEPING AND THEN USING TOO SHORT A STROKE.

3. USING NO CREEP AND THE CORRECT LENGTH OF STROKE FOR THE AMOUNT OF LINE CARRIED, BUT TAILING BY FORMING A CONCAVE PATH OF THE ROD TIP WITH AN ABRUPT SPIKE OF POWER EARLY DURING THE STROKE.

(THESE ALL YIELD A CONCAVE PATH OF THE ROD TIP DURING THE CASTING STROKE.)

You are discussing having candidates demonstrate common causes of tailing loops as opposed to being able to toss one using a very concave hand path. This I think is good and have mentioned to those in my Casting Instructors Workshops that I would expect a knowledgeable candidate to be able to show me more than one or two concrete, “real world” examples. To just force the tail with a concave hand path is not “real world’ as I have never seen a student actually create the tail that way. I have only seen instructors do it, and many times as an incorrect demo of what the student had done to create the tail.

I would like to disagree with your analysis on #3 above. The correct stroke for the amount of line carried is also dependent on the speed of the stroke. If one person is casting good loops with a particular set of gear and then increases the speed of the casting stroke they must also increase the length of the casting stroke to match the power applied to the rod. Casting too fast (abrupt acceleration) is only a problem when the rod is stopped too soon for the amount of energy applied. If the bend is maintained until the rod tip is brought below the line path (regardless of how hard the initial acceleration is), then no tail will occur. So, abrupt power is not to blame here. It is stopping the tip too soon for the amount of power applied. It is similar to your example #1 but caused by different dynamics.

Guy Manning

FFF Master Certified Casting Instructor

Moderator FFFCCI Yahoo Group

www.castflys.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Guy ..... I agree completely. # 3 was an incomplete description. Even a spike of power early during the stroke won't make a tail as long as you can continue that amount of acceleration. The caster usually can't do that, so he can't maintain that amount of rod bend.

The tip dips down as the rod bends ... and then comes up again as the acceleration becomes less and that yields a concave rod tip path.

Even this tail can be aborted if the rod tip comes to RSP far enough below the oncoming line.

You have called attention to a very important parameter; that of the relationship between stroke length and rod bend.

Gordy

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~