@ Slack: I notice now you are right. Unknowingly I was taking a shortcut in the learning process.
@ Bernd: Thanks again for the very clear explanation. This makes it clear for me why my front cast is better than my back cast. I do delay rotation in the FC, but not in the BC.
I'll keep you in the loop of my loop-progress. But not tonight: Sunday night is pokah-night.
We learn from failure, not from success (Bram Stoker Dracula)
I was so cocky that with the few days of instruction in Norway, I thought I could skip a few things on the basics. Lesson learned.
So this evening I worked on my grip (V-grip), and the basic overhead cast as suggested by Paul (8 yards of line, pulling instead of pushing, wrist-snap on FC and BC, Straight Line Path, delayed rotation, crisp stops and relaxing afterwards). Nothing more, nothing less.
Tomorrow same routine because I'm not pleased yet with my stops and rotation-moment.
Excellent, practise nice tight consistent loops preferably thrown at targets. Also practise shooting line on the forward cast. As has been said you need a tight loop on the backcast that will enable some line to be shot in order to be able to double haul, otherwise the upward motion of the hand will always result in slack! This is not difficult, occasionally someone learns in the first lesson, otherwise it happens near the start of the second lesson. When you learn the double haul you'll find that the emphasis switches to the hauling hand, it initiates timing and controls the cast - think "hauling hand" not "rod hand".
Hi Eikre,
I like to tell students to put out a wording that focuses on the worst (most difficult) movement exactly. Then I want them to cast and at the same time say the wording.
As soon as they say it the cast is running well all the time. One of the most helpful things in teaching I know of.
This can be "downuuup" thinking (and saying it) for the rod hand. Or "stop and wait" for the timing on the rod hand.
Mel Krieger likes "whuuump" for smooth accel. to an brupt stop.
This helps to focus at one movement at a time.
Then change the wording (focus on the next part of movement) and finally you have the single movements coming together all in one.
Greets
Bernd
When shooting line, I would say get rid of the stop thinking! Release in steadt...
Cast relaxed and easy, do not use any force, release the line a splitsecond before you would usually make a stop = straight underline, long cast, pointed loop, straightened leader, no tailing loops...
If you try, release higher than usual, aim very high without a stop of the rod and see what happens...
There is no such thing as an AFTM5.
and
You might look up Google - common cents system
Bill,
And there is no rod rating system that can predict how well a rod will cast different lines over a wide range of casting distances.
I think most people would agree with Bruce Richard's assessment given in Lasse's signature line that:
In a nutshell....
The line rating system is 95% OK.
There is no industry rod rating system and likely never will be.
The better your casting skills the less you will care about the previous two points.
Gordy
"Flyfishing: 200 years of tradition unencumbered by progress." Ralph Cutter
Elkre,
Sorry for that. No, I didn't expect you to know what I was talking about. I thought it might you want to learn. I was mistaken.
Nah - cheap and unnecessary shot Bill - lighten up! He's new to this bullshit (35 posts here to date), he's not working in his first language, and probably has no idea what you are on about. As far as I can see he's getting on terms with the ideas and discussion pretty damned fast.
BTW this was not a subject of the thread, and you are going off topic here.
Exactly same discution (and to the point) is in the TACKLE pice of the board, with the thread Ive started about ERN, and AA.
I dont think there is a need to keep talking about what was already said, especially when our friend is askimg about shooting the line in to his backcast.
cheers
mike
Hi Bill,
The sentence Magnus picked out, also left kind of bad taste with me. So although I agree with Mike that this is not the topic to go indepth into this matter, I still would like to reply.
I do want to learn. Everything. But being a trainer myself, in totally other matters than flycasting, I’m a very strong aficionado of the “gradual learning curve”-principle. For a beginner like me – I picked up fly-fishing two months ago – at the moment it suffises to know that if the rod says #5, that you need a #5 flyline to go with that. More than enough to start your basic casts. I know there is also a #4, #6, #8 and many other numbers but the relation stays the same for me: same number on rod as on the flyline. If this is not correct info for a beginner, then please correct me and forgive me my ignorance.
I do realise that once you specialise in a certain domain or expertise that small variations or imperfections do matter and are important. The earth orbits round the sun, not in a circular but in an oval motion (in fact, it’s not perfect oval but this would take this discussion also beyond my knowledge). For us mere mortals a difference that doesn’t matter, but for any theoretical scientist one of the basic fundamentals to understands the correlation between gravity and the spacetime-continuum.
That being said, your reaction spawned a curiosity in me, so I did look into the matter of the discussion to have a universal line rating system. I will not pretend to understand with this is about, not even now, but I do see that this is a quest for THE perfect system. And I do admire people who strive for perfection. The admiration is mostly based on the fact that those people know that perfection is unattainable, but still strive to get as close to it as possible.
PS: 95% is fine by me. Much closer than the figures the constructor of my car uses to describe the diesel consumption of my vehicle which is also done by a universal system.
