I'm happy to look at the variables which contribute to tip path. I'm not happy that you seem to want to dumb it down to one variable badly described.
Oh and being compared to Vaihinger is no insult
1 variable Magnus ? Me thinks you left something major out of the equation. But in any event I don't so much see it as dumbing down the 2 dominant variables as it goes to angular acceleration tip path and loop formation. I rather see it as removing one variable as the non dominate variable that has little if any direct bearing on tip path as it goes to loop formation. 180 tip path without rotation is a straight line, the tip path is straight, the line remains straight. Where's Waldo ? The Vaihinger reference was just an observation, not that I was comparing you to him. Sorry if I left you with the wrong impression :p
I would have a major effect on how I train instructors.
Paul Arden
Stoatstail50 wrote:Here is another bit of reasoning Frank....
Lets say that you are right.
If this is true then I could use any wobbly old hand path I like to add length to my arc and, on the basis that it has no effect, it wouldn't change the tip path one iota with respect to loop formation.
Whaddya think...?
Hey Mark,
Hand plane and hand path work together as the caster rotates the rod along that plane. As the caster rotates the rod, the path of the rod tip is maintained by the angular acceleration the rod butt which directly impacts the path of the rod tip that directly impacts the formation of the loop. Translation will not do that. What translation allows you to do is to apply angular acceleration over a longer distance, but the distance itself will have no direct bearing on tip path. The length of path of the rod tip will be whatever it will be. Translation adds line speed as does the haul. That the line speed will be higher for a cast that uses translation does not mean the loop would be more or less narrow than a cast that uses less translation. It's easy enough to see if you try it both ways. Also consider how important the stop is to loop formation and how much of anyones stop is translated over such a brief time interval.
This may sound a bit odd but I really don't think this has any thing to do with being right. It is what it is. Either you see it or you don't. I can't think for you nor are you asking me to either. It's like whatever, at this point, after 7 years of going back and forth on this issue with nothing new added to change what we already seem to have a good grasp of, but that others for some reason refuse to acknowledge. I suspect that will not change either.
That's what I think
Frank
I would have a major effect on how I train instructors.
Paul Arden
Trying to translate that thought is more difficult than trying to understand how translation of the rod has a direct bearing on tip path as it relates to loop formation. No surprise there.
I would have a major effect on how I train instructors.
Paul Arden
so, if prior to rotation andy with a rod has a hand path like the one in the right hand diagram on page 8, what happens to the loop he casts?
its a genuine question Frank, it at least deserves a genuine answer. it's my understanding that any deviation from SLP during any part of the stroke with have an effect on the loop thats made.
if i dont translate then SLP is almost (edit) impossible anyway, a circle of course having no "straight line" edges. if this is the case (which im pretty sure it is) then we know that SLP can only be achieved by translation. now i asked you
and who controls where the rod tip goes?
and you said
Andy with a rod does
which means that where my hand is going has a direct effect on where the rod tip is. so if my hand travels through SCS (straight casting stroke ) the only anomalies that could throw the tip out of SLP are poorly applied power during the casting stroke, or a poorly timed haul.
The way I see it, if my hand travels straight and I cast using correct power application I will get a good loop. If i venture out of SCS (straight casting stroke) or apply power incorrectly then I will compromise SLP and the resulting loop will suck a bit.
i hope this makes sense, it does to me. its very late. the fact that im willing to stay up til gone 1am talking about fly casting means that maybe i give a shit. you appear to have picked up on the fact that in FF terms i'm quite young
lad
. i am indeed a measly 25 years old Frank, but if the way senior FFF members which to encourage young anglers to have discussions is to use a sarcastic, condescending tone then i wont bother with you or your organisation.
in short any more of this
Okay andy you win, ya got me. What was I thinkin lad
and you can shit off.
thankyou.
"God's always with me;
standing beside me with his big black dick."
andy_with_a_rod wrote:so the line goes where the rod tip goes?
i know you didn't ask me....
for simple teaching practices... for beginners, i describe the tip as a pencil point... "draw the shape of the loop you want using the rod tip" "watch the line follow the tip"... circle eights and all that ala Joan Wulff. and then have the student move the rod through sharp change of directions.
but, there's more to it than that IMHO.
the tip is merely the last pc of rod touching the line.
the line goes where the momentum is aimed. i would think that would be a little lower than the tip... where the rod bend is at the body's rotational stop.
