Equator Model

[Paul Arden]

It's not about learning to cast efficiently or otherwise, I'm actually trying to understand your model. So rotation that is inefficient is creep and rotation that is efficient is casting stroke.

Drag is efficient but can't carry 90 ft alone so that's not in the casting stroke.

Does your model allow for inefficient casting strokes?

Cheers, Paul

[Frank LoPresti]

Well it's a graphic that depicts what the most efficient parts of the casting stroke constitute, and that relates to efficient casting, provided of course, that the force imparted to the rod during the casting stroke, was efficiently applied.

Creep and drag for example as stand alone motions, are non-efficient rod motions that would not be a part of the casting stroke, because as stand alone motions, they would not would result in efficient loop formation, which is why they remain outside of the CS for that graphic.

Not all casts can ever be exempt from inefficient applications of power, but neither do inefficient power applications need to be included in such a model either, only that the goal of any casting model in my opinion should only reflect those parts of the CS, that when power is efficiently applied, result in a well formed loop. There is no single model for example, of how to correctly apply power to the rod, nor would I expect there to be either.

What I would expect though is that the basic casting terminology of a fly cast be accurately rendered and defined, so that when power or force is actually applied to the rod, or efficiently applied to the rod, that those basic rod motions reflect the terminology as to the base constituent parts of the fly cast that do indeed result in efficient loop formation.

Frank

[Paul Arden]

But you've included inefficient force application at the beginning of your stroke in your model, and you've singled that out because it is inefficient. Are there any times when Creep in your model could be considered efficient, such as in my example of narrowing the available arc and throwing a tight loop?

[Frank LoPresti]

Not really. The CS is the CS as is SL and CA. No mention of anything having to do with efficient or inefficient anything inside or outside of the graphic. Only than certain combinations can and might happen at the same time or not.

Frank

[Paul Arden]

Hmm. So when does creep become CS in your model? You've told me it was about efficiency, now you say there's no mention of it. I'm not quite sure what to make of that to be honest.

Cheers Paul

[Frank LoPresti]

Make of it what you want but the difficulty is that you can't model casting on applications of force. You can't convey force for a generalized model of casting, only that in a general sense, that the force be efficient enough to form a loop. Force applied is contingent upon to many variables ; line length, line weight, type of loop, fly size, rod wt, line weight, rod stiffness, rod length, wind, no wind, that it would be impossible to say with any precision what force is required, only that it be efficient enough to form the loop.

Secondary forces applied to the rod such as rotational and translational drift, creep, and or drag, fall outside the margins of efficiency as to their impact on actual loop formation. The best you can do verbally and graphically is to generalize with some sense of specificity. Trying to verbally parse when creep would end and the stroke began is an exercise in futility.

Throw in the CA and no two casts will ever be the same either. That, and try as I might I don't try and mimic the expert readings on the CA, why would I do that ? I might need a very wide loop for one reason or another, or a very tight one, or I might be casting into the wind and my readings on the CA for those casts will not mimic the experts readings, nor would I expect them to either.

So trying to quantify the force applications of a fly cast and then apply that to a generalized model as to when those motions transition from one stage to the next requires you to quantify rod force applications for each and every stroke, and for each and every stroke those quantitative readings will vary as would the terminology which in turn muddies the very idea of having any model of the casting stroke to begin with, as if all parts of the stroke should now be treated as equal, when clearly they are not.

When does anything become anything ?

Frank

[Paul Arden]

If that's the case then why have creep or drag at all then? It seems pretty pointless if you can separate them from the casting stroke.

[Frank LoPresti]

In the case of creep I agree. But it's such a common problem why not "include" it. As to drag, why not include that also. Transitional and rotational drift are more important than either of those in my opinion.

Frank

[Paul Arden]

What happens if you both translate and rotate inefficiently at the beginning? Is it possible in your model to Creep and Drag together? Dreep?

[Frank LoPresti]

That's noted in the graphic. And the fact that you can rotational and translationally drift at the same time as well.

[Paul Arden]

However creep is inefficient and drag is efficient. What would the overall combination be? Could drag make creep efficient or would creep make drag inefficient, or would it in fact be a case of both efficient creep and inefficient drag, Frank?

Cheers, Paul

[Frank LoPresti]

If creep eclipses the start of the casting stroke you've simply under optimized the casting stroke with slow premature rod rotation. Drag would only serve to decrease the length of the CS, no problem with that obviously. How can starting the casting stroke with weak rotation be viewed as anything but weak ?

[Paul Arden]

You can never start the CS with weak rotation in your model. The only CS you allow is an effective one. If it's ineffective it's not part of your CS, right?

[Frank LoPresti]

I think that's a misrepresentation of the larger point. That graphic does not disallowing for anything. No one I know except for you, is in favor of modeling the casting stroke with less then optimal rotational acceleration at the start of the CS.

You want to pick nits over transitions which is fine by me. But the graphic I put up has nothing to do with transitions. It simply diagrams the different parts of a cast as to what goes to what. It's seems like your arguing with yourself and your not sure how a good sound casting stroke should start.

Frank

[Paul Arden]

The lines on the graphics are transitions.