Fault Based Casting Model

Frank LoPresti · Post by **Frank LoPresti** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:32 pm

Paul,

I'm just curious. In the SL casting model if the result of the action of the caster does not match his intent or purpose than any action that does not match the intent or purpose the caster is had intended is considered a fault right by SL standard ?

Frank

Paul Arden · Post by **Paul Arden** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:38 pm

Probably.

Frank LoPresti · Post by **Frank LoPresti** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:17 pm

I'll take probably as a yes. Can you think of any other sport that applies this Fault point of view to it's entire model for instruction purposes or for terminology that is meant to be used for the purposes of testing ? Typically I've never seen the word fault coupled to instruction in any sport with the exception of Tennis and foot faults. If new caster never picked up a fly rod before and decided to take a lesson with you then everything that the casters does according to this approach would have to be deemed a fault.

Paul Arden · Post by **Paul Arden** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:33 pm

Possibly.

Frank LoPresti · Post by **Frank LoPresti** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:43 pm

Name one.

How do you teach a beginner just starting out, by first point out his faults and then correcting his faults ?

Caster comes to you and can't cast beyond 60 feet but can cast to 60 feet really well. What faults are you going to correct in order to get him to cast to 85 feet if he has never tried to go beyond 60.

Paul Arden · Post by **Paul Arden** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:47 pm

Casting Stroke.

Frank LoPresti · Post by **Frank LoPresti** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 3:57 pm

Where ? in what books and how often do you see the word fault even mentioned if at all...

Any other sports that task a fault based approach to instructing, Golf, Swimming, Baseball, Cricket, Soccer, Ping Pong, Pool, Badminton, Skiing, Ice Skating, Track and Field, Horse Racing......

Will · Post by **Will** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:33 pm

They have faults in horse riding - jumping faults, and time faults.

Just sayin'...

W.

Paul Arden · Post by **Paul Arden** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 4:48 pm

Golf faults, swimming faults, baseball faults, cricket faults, Soccer faults, Ping Pong, Pool... you can google the rest.

Frank LoPresti · Post by **Frank LoPresti** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 7:56 pm

I see other descriptions like negative influence and or problems. or even errors when it come to casting but what I'm saying is that you do not find faults or problems mentioned in books on casting instruction or in casting models in general. I've got many books on casting instruction and there is no mention if at all as to fault anywhere in any of them.

So you have a caster just getting started, is everything that the caster does considered to be a fault by you ? If the caster has no built in muscle memory and can't go from wide to narrow loops, is that a question of fault ? With your model it would have to be. In your model lack of muscle memory would fall under the category of unintentional rod motion and would have to be considered as a fault.

I think your whole approach goes to somehow justifying the inclusion of drift as intentional in the direction of the cast, (no fault), and creep as an unintentional fault as if the two terms were mutually exclusive of one another as to intent.

Something faulty in that line of logic if you ask me.

Rich Knoles · Post by **Rich Knoles** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 9:52 pm

Yours is number 3 Frank.

Mel even made a video

Paul Arden · Post by **Paul Arden** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:38 pm

Congratulations Frank, it's good to be in the top ten.

Frank LoPresti · Post by **Frank LoPresti** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:51 pm

The link did not post up Rich. But that is beside the point. I have no problem is referring to serious casting issues as it goes to poor form. What I do not do is base a model of casting around a single fault and try and claim it as something else by definition of intent. That's not a functioning model for anything. But again you rarely see those issues in very good casters. You can't call it a fault simply because someone is unaware or has yet to learn what the proper motion is and internalize that motion over time. Rome was not built in a day, does that mean the entire city was at fault because it was still being built ? God instruction is not centered around a fault based model of casting from which we learn. Look at Mel's Essence, Joans book, Jason and his dads book, Mac's book. Not one mention in their models of the cast that has anything to do with fault.

Frank LoPresti · Post by **Frank LoPresti** » Mon Apr 25, 2011 10:58 pm

Frank LoPresti wrote:So you have a caster just getting started, is everything that the caster does considered to be a fault by you ? If the caster has no built in muscle memory and can't go from wide to narrow loops, is that a question of fault ? With your model it would have to be. In your model lack of muscle memory would fall under the category of unintentional rod motion and would have to be considered as a fault.

I think your whole approach goes to somehow justifying the inclusion of drift as intentional in the direction of the cast, (no fault), and creep as an unintentional fault as if the two terms were mutually exclusive of one another as to intent.

I'd frankly be more impressed Paul if you could respond to how you apply a fault based casting model to this situation. Or as you readily admit that your model only applies to those who already are very proficient casters and only to those casters that use drift in the cast.

Big problems there.

Paul Arden · Post by **Paul Arden** » Tue Apr 26, 2011 2:55 am

Interestingly God instruction IS centred around a fault based model.

The Archived Board

The Archived Board

Fault Based Casting Model

Fault Based Casting Model

Who is online