PLEASE NOTE: In order to post on the Board you need to have registered. To register please email paul@sexyloops.com including your real name and username. Registration takes less than 24hrs, unless Paul is fishing deep in the jungle!

Welcome Peter Hayes!

Moderator: Paul Arden

jphasey
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:30 pm
Answers: 0

Welcome Peter Hayes!

#21

Post by jphasey »

Paul Arden wrote:How do you guys find the hook-ups with reversed dry flies? Is there a greater number of missed fish? I have a few suspender buzzers tied in this fashion because I think that the bend of the hook is more realistic this way.

I can see a few evenings spent tying in the near future :)

Cheers, Paul
I've not generally found it a problem Paul, the hackle would need to be very stiff and thickly wound to interfere with hooking, I think.
Most hooking problems in my humble, spring from tethering by the tippet preventing the fly going fully into the fish's mouth, or from instantaneous ejecting when it gets in, is pressed up against the roof of the mouth by the toothy tongue, and found wanting (too hard, not crunchy, not a recognised prey item). Once in, the more the trout can crush it upwards with its tongue and find it crunchy/soft, the longer in nanoseconds it will hold it and the more likely is a hook-up to result.
Spooky and well-fished-for fish eject very quickly indeed and need to be struck quickly, whilst confident feeders usually hook themselves if you just lift into the take, is what I generally find.
Can't always tell in advance which is which, tho' ,can you?
And never use the words always and never, there are always exceptions!
jphasey
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:30 pm
Answers: 0

Welcome Peter Hayes!

#22

Post by jphasey »

John Finn wrote:
Paul Arden wrote:How do you guys find the hook-ups with reversed dry flies? Is there a greater number of missed fish? I have a few suspender buzzers tied in this fashion because I think that the bend of the hook is more realistic this way.
Was thinking the same way Paul about buzzers . Had a trailing shuck coming off the eye disguising the tippet which I also wanted sunk. Didn't notice any difference in hookups but haven't looked deeply into this.
Just wondering now Peter do trout approach an upwing fly differently depending on how it's approaching. ie do they look to take it head first or does it matter ? Tippet coming off the head of the fly might interfere with a take sometimes ? ..............................John
Yes John,I agree, the tippet has to get past the trout's nose when you are fishing upstream in rivers (not, when fishing downstream, or in stillwaters). That's one reason why in my book I say float the tippet when fishing floating flies upstream--at least the tippet doesn't have to brush past the trout's eye for him to eat it! And he only sees it once, in the surface, as against the two images he sees (one directly through the water; and a second, reflected, in the mirror) if the tippet is sunk.
I'm sure trout don't manoeuvre to take upwings head on or tail on. Watched thousands take my fly, happily!
Tippet's a problem whichever way he takes the hook and whichever way round the fly's tied, I think.Needs to be loose and limp and not have you or the current pulling on it. Don't do big mends for this reason, just little ones, line only not tippet!
Floating tippet is not ideal for downstream floating fly ,and definitely counter-indicated on stillwaters, when in both cases the fish is mainly on the other side of the fly from the angler.
Thanks for the thoughtful input.
User avatar
Paul Arden
Site Admin
Posts: 19579
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
Answers: 2
Location: Belum Rainforest
Contact:

Welcome Peter Hayes!

#23

Post by Paul Arden »

Can't always tell in advance which is which, tho' ,can you?
I tend to hit fast takes quickly and slow takes slowly (or longer delay). Not sure if it's necessarily spookiness, Gourami are always spooky and always eat slowly. Those tiny sip downs with trout have to be hit fast however. Especially if they have the resistance of a floating leader!

Well as you know I disagree with you on floating leaders! And in all situations. In times when the leader refuses to sink that's when we need to go very thin.

Having said that, the fact that you subscribe to a floating leader does make me think. I know you catch fish, so it must work! (Just not for me :p)

The main reason I think the leader should be sunk is because in the film the light reflects around it. We've all seen the refusals on stillwaters, why should it be any different on moving water? Granted it is perhaps less important because the fish has less time to eat.

Incidentally I think the fish's brain only sees what it wants to see, otherwise we'd never catch them. The only fish that has really made me think differently has been Gourami - I've actually started to question myself whether they see the hook. But I still don't believe that!

Cheers, Paul
It's an exploration; bring a flyrod.

Flycasting Definitions
John Finn
Posts: 247
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2014 8:35 pm
Answers: 0

Welcome Peter Hayes!

#24

Post by John Finn »

[quote="jphasey"]That's one reason why in my book I say float the tippet when fishing floating flies upstream--at least the tippet doesn't have to brush past the trout's eye for him to eat it! And he only sees it once, in the surface, as against the two images he sees (one directly through the water; and a second, reflected, in the mirror) if the tippet is sunk.[/quote
That's really interesting Peter, hadn't thought of it like that. I spend a lot of time fishing for selective trout . Agree with your point about Bob Wyatt's book , but I don't think he was talking about trout feeding in fairly intense hatches which is what I happily spend most of my time doing. I find tippet to be a real turn off at times and consequently use 7x whenever I can get away with it . This is very difficult to sink so I don't bother most of the time.I also find the best results if I can position myself at an angle to the fish rather than directly downstream. This ties in directly with what you are saying.
I have often had days when trout seemingly take the fly but no matter how you time the strike nothing is there. Bob Wyatt reckons that the fish simply misses the fly but I don't agree. Granted fish can miss the fly especially early in the season with the first surface takes but when fish after fish does it something else is at play. I think its a last second rejection. Something is not quite right with the fly or tippet and the trout does not close his mouth on the fly but can drown it. I have seen footage somewhere of trout taking artificial flys openmouthed and just taking them off the surface. I remember seeing Grouper in a tank taking food items fantastically quickly and when it was slowed down you could see that they had to expell water through the gill as the mouth was closing to take in the item.If they don't expell the item wont go in. Probably the same for all fish.Think trout are doing the same thing , by not expelling through the gills it allows them a final last millisecond rejection. Buggers :D Interested to have your thoughts on this.
jphasey
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:30 pm
Answers: 0

Welcome Peter Hayes!

#25

Post by jphasey »

Paul Arden wrote:
Can't always tell in advance which is which, tho' ,can you?
I tend to hit fast takes quickly and slow takes slowly (or longer delay). Not sure if it's necessarily spookiness, Gourami are always spooky and always eat slowly. Those tiny sip downs with trout have to be hit fast however. Especially if they have the resistance of a floating leader!

Well as you know I disagree with you on floating leaders! And in all situations. In times when the leader refuses to sink that's when we need to go very thin.

Having said that, the fact that you subscribe to a floating leader does make me think. I know you catch fish, so it must work! (Just not for me :p)

The main reason I think the leader should be sunk is because in the film the light reflects around it. We've all seen the refusals on stillwaters, why should it be any different on moving water? Granted it is perhaps less important because the fish has less time to eat.

Incidentally I think the fish's brain only sees what it wants to see, otherwise we'd never catch them. The only fish that has really made me think differently has been Gourami - I've actually started to question myself whether they see the hook. But I still don't believe that!

Cheers, Paul
Oh I love disagreements!
Out of them cometh a kind of truth--or at least greater refinement of it...
Refusals on stillwaters is what leads many good anglers to reject my recommendation to float the tippet when fishing upstream on rivers: but it's an extrapolation from one circumstance to a totally different one.
Last season I caught 125 good fish on rivers on a floating tippet and I have put photos of all of them on my Facebook page in an album called "Good Fish on floating tippet 2015". Just about every one is over 17' or 2lbs and all were good fish for the river in question. Haven't counted the smaller ones but they're largely in my picture diary and catch returns--at least five times as many, over say 10". Didn't fish the floating fly on a river without a floating tippet....so the comparisons between using each are in the past and I didn't really keep good enough records of which fish were caught on which!
I successfully use tippets 1X heavier when floating them (provided they are long--4' plus; and loose) than I find I can use for a sunk nymph.
On Corrib, the good and the great anglers are using, when floating flies in the Caenis, 3lb BS tippet (necessarily sunk, degreased every cast) and taking half an hour to land a decent fish.I've been out there, doing it, three years in a row, It's the only way to get the podded-up, spooky-as-hell fish: but in a river you'd hook them, and land them in 5 minutes, on 5lb tippet. But then on a river they are having your fly carried down to them: decision time is more or less forced on them, whereas your stillwater fish can, and frequently does, swim round the fly looking at it, or is just as likely to have seen it sideways on in the first place.
Any way, my point is, the floating tippet works fine/better than sunk, on rivers. People who've tried it are sticking with it.
So there!
Neer neer ne neer neer!
Sucks to you Paul!

(look, I've always found it hard to handle criticism)
User avatar
Graeme H
Posts: 2892
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2013 2:54 pm
Answers: 0
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Welcome Peter Hayes!

#26

Post by Graeme H »

jphasey wrote: So there!
Neer neer ne neer neer!
Sucks to you Paul!

(look, I've always found it hard to handle criticism)
It appears to me that you handle criticism just fine. :pirate: :D

Cheers,
Graeme
FFi CCI
jphasey
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:30 pm
Answers: 0

Welcome Peter Hayes!

#27

Post by jphasey »

Yeah one's playground learnings are never forgotten and frequently useful esp as you get older and second childhood beckons, Graeme. Thanks for the support if that's what it was!
User avatar
Paul Arden
Site Admin
Posts: 19579
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
Answers: 2
Location: Belum Rainforest
Contact:

Welcome Peter Hayes!

#28

Post by Paul Arden »

:D :D :D

Well I don't find that to be the case :p

I started a conversation recently, that if you had a time machine and could fish with five anglers who would they be?
It's an exploration; bring a flyrod.

Flycasting Definitions
jphasey
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:30 pm
Answers: 0

Welcome Peter Hayes!

#29

Post by jphasey »

Paul Arden wrote::D :D :D

Well I don't find that to be the case :p

I started a conversation recently, that if you had a time machine and could fish with five anglers who would they be?
Hmmm.
George Skues in the late 1920s, George Marryatt in 1883, Alfred Ronalds in the late 1830s, Robert Venables in the 1660s, and William Samuels in the 1570s. Then I'd have some kind of idea what really went down at those times, Man, and where those guys were really at. And get to fish when those great hatches poured off the water: mindblowing!
Don't have time m/c however, can I borrow yours?
User avatar
Paul Arden
Site Admin
Posts: 19579
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
Answers: 2
Location: Belum Rainforest
Contact:

Welcome Peter Hayes!

#30

Post by Paul Arden »

Halford's not on your list then? :D
It's an exploration; bring a flyrod.

Flycasting Definitions
Post Reply

Return to “A week with...”