Structuring multiple lessons

[John Waters]

This is an interesting discussion for me, it highlights how each of us view and categorise specific segments of the fly casting world and the relative attention we devote to both the performance and the instruction. Tournament casts are but one segment, as are short line fishing, long line fishing and fishing presentation casts segments of that casting world. Many may disagree but I think we can define a model of casting instruction and I would like to float some ideas about what that model could look like.

I'll flesh it out over the next few days.

Be gentle with me, I am but a caster,

John
NCSQEP

[John Waters]

How do you equate the contribution of Jeff’s hips and shoulders compared to his arm movement to line speed? He defines distance casting as “whatever is longer for you” so that covers quite a range of recreational fishing distances. Good definition.

Thanks John, I’ve looked at the video and know what you are looking at. Now considering I asked you for your views on the adage for short line/short stroke- long line/long stroke earlier in the thread. At post 102 you answered:

Short casts and long casts use the proximal to distal principle, the challenge (for caster and instructor) in either cast is the use of translation. The adage does not contradict the principle, unless translation is incorrectly used.

His demonstration of the long cast is proximal to distal and fits the adage of increasing stroke length with line length, as did the video of Joan Wulff that I posted where she advocated increasing the elbow movement for longer line. You did not perceive a problem with her explanation, why is that not an arm centric technique? The demonstration is performed sat down.

Both techniques meet general fishing distance cast objectives but I perceive that there could be a risk of hyperextension injuries occurring for the reasons I described in Post 101 but I couldn’t quantify the degree of risk. Neither Mark or myself cast like that but we both carry shoulder injuries and our technique is aligned to your thinking, not for absolute distance but to reduce distal load. I did qualify the practical limitations though at Post 89:

As ever it is down to objectives. If your objective is to achieve maximal acceleration and the largest possible speed at the end of the linked segments of the kinetic chain then you are going the right way. Personally, I have never given a lesson where that is the objective.

I would coach the use of the kinetic chain to reduce the possibility of injury but the “right” way doesn’t work if I’m sat on a rock in the middle of a stream like a happy little Buddha, it has to be modified to the objective and the solution may be arm centric.

Regards

Vince

Hi Vince,

I was not critiquing the videos but now you mention it am happy to do so. They do not fully comply with proximal to distal patterning when both Dan and Jeff demo distance technique and it is incorrect to assume they do. You can search the specific kinetic chain proximal to distal patterning and sequencing for yourself but am happy to help you identify the non compliance. I did notice the demonstration was performed seated. and of course that movement is arm centric because the line length cast does not require any other segment patterning. I employ the same pattern when I cast short lines for fish or targets, so does every other accuracy caster I have ever seen cast. Increasing the elbow movement does not convert Joan's shoulder to wrist proximal to distal movement to a movement pattern that any biomechanist would say was the foundation stroke of a caster casting as far as he/she was able. The problem is when an arm centric technique is used for distance. I did perceive a problem with the explanation but stating it would have been off topic when answering the questions you posed. As I've said many times, short line to long line casting should involve more proximal joint movement range and sequencing in a rotational pattern, not in the linear pattern most instructors advocate. I'm not sure wheter you advocate that or how you instruct it as you do not fish or instruct at extreme distances.

Buddha would use the same stroke as Joan shows, arm centric because sitting on a rock in a stream would necessitate short line casts, methinks. If he wanted to cast further he would stand up. I'm sure he would not sink.

John

[Paul Arden]

Because it’s not a very versatile technique.

My reason for changing it, or suggesting a change, would be because the same cast can be made with less effort if the wrist is utilised in the stroke. I won’t change it if I’m guiding and will have to deal with it. This is because it’s going to take a long time to change. I won’t change it one month out from a CCI test. That would be a disaster. But given the right circumstances I will want to offer alternatives, not because it produces higher line speed (which it can) but because the sequencing of movement involves less effort than a frozen wrist.

Mostly however I’ll want them to transfer movement from the forearm to the wrist (as opposed to have the wrist and forearm move together), with the wrist acting as a hinge allowing momentum to move from the forearm to the rod butt. So the wrist isn’t driven but to use John’s term allowed to “flail”. This doesn’t mean that the wrist is simply allowed to flail to its maximum and it will normally be braked too. Indeed it can be very subtle which has been called for example the “micro second wrist”. But it’s not done by tapping the wrist but instead by allowing it to flip naturally, because it’s quicker and less effort without tension in the hinge.

That’s what I look for when trying to develop an Intermediate level caster along. It will take many months. It’s certainly not a quick fix like the frozen wrist was in the first place.

I think the main reason people get “stuck” at 75’ is because they are not utilising the kinetic chain. There can also be tracking and loop issues but the main brake in progress is the sequence of body movement and how it’s ultimately applying force to the rod. I see that as being the core basics. It’s simple throwing mechanics.

Cheers, Paul

[Stoatstail50]

I have a couple of questions for you now….because we’re in the teaching section.

How would a caster independently discover relaxed control over the wrist as a solution for excess effort ?

Do you remember a presentation on white bear theory? SL meet on the Annan.

[VGB]

Hi John

They do not fully comply with proximal to distal patterning when both Dan and Jeff demo distance technique and it is incorrect to assume they do.

It is also incorrect to assume that they are required to "fully" comply with proximal to distal patterning. It may be an essential for absolute distance casting but there is no threshold requirement for compliance in the MCI distance cast task because the casting objectives for competition distance are different to fishing distance, either in an assessment or in the wild.

Increasing the elbow movement does not convert Joan's shoulder to wrist proximal to distal movement to a movement pattern that any biomechanist would say was the foundation stroke of a caster casting as far as he/she was able.

There is no requirement that I am aware of in any instructor organisation to cast as far as they are able. The similar but different casting objectives are still being applied as with the Jeff Wagner video.

I'm not sure wheter you advocate that or how you instruct it as you do not fish or instruct at extreme distances.

I instruct it because I think that it reduces the load at the distal joints rather than to obtain extreme distances. My rationale is based on a simplistic engineering judgement and I have no evidence to say if or how much difference it makes.

Buddha would use the same stroke as Joan shows, arm centric because sitting on a rock in a stream would necessitate short line casts, methinks. If he wanted to cast further he would stand up. I'm sure he would not sink.

If he stood up, he would probably spook a lot of fish and would need to cast a long way to catch one. Given that Paul said earlier that it is possible to cast 100ft laying down, I do not think distance is an issue. But having presented a dry fly to a rising fish from a prone position, seeing the rise is very difficult and Bhudda has missed every single one that he rose when lying flat on his back.

regards

Vince

[VGB]

I think the main reason people get “stuck” at 75’ is because they are not utilising the kinetic chain.

Do you think that it is a gentic issue with these people, given that we naturally evolved to throw?

[Paul Arden]

I have a couple of questions for you now….because we’re in the teaching section.

How would a caster independently discover relaxed control over the wrist as a solution for excess effort ?

Do you remember a presentation on white bear theory? SL meet on the Annan.

Part one I don’t think they do. I think it’s taught and trained. It took me a long time to understand it. And I don’t read anything about it either. It’s exceptionally rare I believe.

No I don’t but I’ll look it up. Just off to the campfire with spuds!

Cheers, Paul

[Paul Arden]

I think the main reason people get “stuck” at 75’ is because they are not utilising the kinetic chain.

Do you think that it is a gentic issue with these people, given that we naturally evolved to throw?

I think we evolved to throw but very few people are good at it. It’s not a honed skill unless we are dealing with a sportsman. Which I’m sure you’ll have noticed makes our teaching much easier when we are.

Cheers, Paul

[VGB]

I was yanking your chain Paul, we have evolutionary adaptions that enhance our ability to throw. It is like walking, a learned not a natural skill Do you think marathon runners would make good casters?

regards

Vince

[Stoatstail50]

Part one I don’t think they do.

I don't think they do either...in fact I think it would be massively unlikely in all but the most exceptional of circumstances. Effort is very rarely, if ever, front and foremost in the minds of most casters I've ever taught. It is certainly a concern for instructors but this is an issue of reducing eye-bulging force input usually, I've had a few at serious risk of a prolapse. It's definitely not a matter of saving a few ergs with a wrist flop.

Nevertheless, it would be quite unusual to put a lens on a particular body part in an effort to reduce...umm... effort. If an instructor does decide to specifically recommend this wrist flop then casters will necessarily direct their focus internally onto one particular part of that kinetic chain that we're promoting. Plus, if white bear is added in to the mix, then there is a risk of casters ignoring management of combined sources of unnecessary erg consumption in the chain in favour of a relatively minor but very specific one.





.