Newbie on here looking for advice - Help with tackle choice and more

[thedeadskunk]

Hi guys, first post and all that so don't shaft me :-)

I did not at all mind turning 50 years of age. Then I received "the letter" from SAGA insurance. For all you foreigners and Welshmen on here: Saga is the company you deal with over 50's insurance: decrepit old piss-their-pants codgers with erectile dysfunction just like me. Guys that letter was a real depressing bummer.
Decided there and then I was going to make my mark, before I withered and died.
Leave an unbeatable record, a legacy, behind. So, In years to come, fellow fly fishers would peruse the B.F.C.C . fly casting records and ask themselves, “just who was “thedeadskunk.” How in God’s name did he manage 150 feet with a #7 weigh line?
So here I am, clueless as just how to go about achieving the aforementioned.
Do I start go with 9 footer, or opt for a 9’6”? Most, for reasons unknown to me, prefer the 9 footer.
I placed a thread on the fly fishing forum asking the same sort of question. See here:
http://www.flyforums.co.uk/casting....se.html
So, just what is the 170 cast? Why use a 9 foot rod, when all I know about fly casting screams “Use the 9’6!”
How best to achieve true tracking? Questions, questions, questions.
So many questions so little skill, so little knowledge; so go easy on me guys.

[Paul Arden]

Hello thedeadskunk, and welcome to the Board!

I would throw the 9ft6. For me at least, in practise while casting down a tape, I get longer casts. The 170 cast is a wide casting arc, that works best with long carries. A few guys use it for shooting heads too. The best way to achieve true tracking is to pick targets both behind and in front, look at them before you start your casting stroke, and deliver straight to them. The further away your targets the easier it is to be straight.

Cheers, Paul

[Hal Jordan]

Sounds simple. For those of us also in the 50+ category beginning distance casting needs to be done gradually. Grabbing a 9'6" 7wt and heading out to the casting field to flail away will probably result in an injury and when you hit 50 those sort of things don't heal very quickly and you will end up giving up the dream before you even see your first backing knot. The 170 cast can be particularly hard on the shoulder.

A shorter rod will be less stressful on the joints but provides less leverage so won't cast as far. It's a tradeoff in your physical abilities. You could use a lighter and shorter rod for most of your practice and a longer heavier rod for limited practice and competition.

Paul's advice on tracking is excellent but if you are just beginning there is a bit of a trick associated with casting to a target behind you. Most people tend to turn their body to look at the target behind them and that throws off their tracking. Learn how to spot the rear target while maintaining tracking.

There is a lot of debate about which style works best for distance casting. The 170 certainly works for many people but not everyone uses that style. It also looks cool when done properly. Find yourself a good instructor and work with that person to develop a style and hopefully avoid injury. You may also find that your style evolves as you develop.

By the way, welcome to the 50+ casting club.

[Marc LaMouche]

hey skunk,
your questions make me think you're new to the distance game.
keep in mind above all that no matter the kit used, it's not going to go anywhere if the caster doesn't make it move in the right way and this regardless of style.
in other words, forget the kit, work on the mechanics and your style first.

since you're so old why not save a few precious years and a shitload of frustration and gear changing and get tuition from a distance specialist.
you already know who... :;):

cheers,
marc

[thedeadskunk]

Many thanks guys.Yes, new to the distance game.
Done a bit in my fishing life though: Won a few big individual comps, invented the blob fly, been a Euro fly dressing champion, and represented England at international level also.Workout most days too.Bench 140kgs.
Which 9.6" rods would you guys recommend?
Many thanks
Paul

P.S. I've never been one for asking for help: visual casting help by way of instruction that is.
Just thought I'd have a bash on my own by way of popping over my local park, with the correct tackle, and giving it a blast. If I think I'm not up to it, I'll crawl up my own ar5e and hide

[Hal Jordan]

Workout most days too.Bench 140kgs.

That's where many older people get fooled. It's certainly a lot better than bench 50 kgs but not necessarily the right muscle groups. I'll bet Joan Wulff and Lefty Kreh together couldn't bench 50.

[Hal Jordan]

Which 9.6" rods would you guys recommend?

Look for the stiffest and lightest rods you can find to start with. This may not be ideal for you but typical for distance casting. Check the ERN database. Consider building your own.

[thedeadskunk]

Which 9.6" rods would you guys recommend?

Look for the stiffest and lightest rods you can find to start with. This may not be ideal for you but typical for distance casting. Check the ERN database. Consider building your own.

Just sent Dr Harrison an e-mail, come begging letter.It'll be interesting to see what's available, and what's to come.
Thanks for all the help guys.It's appreciated.

[Stu Jamieson]

Just on a bit of an aside: what is considered a good "distance cast" for practical fishing purposes. Many talk of long distance casting but no one ever seems to define what one is. I know this is a "how long is a piece of string" question but I guess what I'm asking is, for fishing purposes, what kind of distance should you reasonably be able to cast to be considered a decent practical caster? I mean, I'm just pushing out towards 80ft; is that pretty good or can any idiot caster do that and I ought to set my goal at 100ft (or even beyond)?

[Michal Duzynski]

Hi Stu
Welcome to the board.
Recently I had the same discusion.
The proper cast is the one which alowes you to put your fly to the fish.
Cheers
mike

[Stu Jamieson]

Haha, yeah that was kind of the reply I expected. But surely you guys must know at least within yourselves what a decent long cast is. A 30ft cast may be a "proper" cast in a given situation but nobody is going to call that a "long cast".

I'm just trying to set a realistic goal for myself whereby I can say, "well if I can cast to that distance, I can pretty much cover any situation (within reason)".

[blackwater]

Stu, I would want to be able to cast most standard fly lines 90ft with maybe 2-3 false casts. This is further than i would need in nearly every fishing situation i have ever been in. The thing is that when i want to cast a fly 70 or 80ft to a feeding fish I can do it without even thinking about it.

Most often i would be fishing in the 50-70ft range on lakes and saltwater. Much shorter on most of the rivers i fish.

[Stu Jamieson]

Thanks for that, Blackwater, that's just the information I was looking for.

Okay, so I can cast to 70-75ft on two false casts so I'm pretty happy with how I'm tracking so far. A little more practice should see me right.