The Board

From Gary’s FP http://www.sexyloops.com/index.php/ps/casting-variables

While I generally agree with the simplistic description that a common casting fault (a tailing loop) is caused by an inappropriate application of power, I don’t think it is anywhere explicit enough.

Would it not be better to say the fault is because the caster’s input has not matched the profile of the rod?

Does not that also hold true for other faults like wide loops or shock waves?

Yes I absolutely agree. I think that’s a very insightful comment. I wonder how confusing or enlightening is is for others?

Thanks,
Paul

So you can have one rod that throw a tail and a other that throws a good loop for the same input, or am I understanding this wrong?

Cheers
Lasse

Yes I agree - of course!

Cheers, Paul

Are you really really sure about that Paul? Even if said rods have to be fishable?

Cheers
Lasse

Yes of course. When we pick up a new rod we always make subtle adjunstments to our casting stroke. This is what makes Sexyloops Shootouts very interesting. Adapting to fibreglass, split cane, different lengths and actions.

As an extreme example try distance casting with a fibre glass noodle. We’ve done this in many shootouts and it’s always interesting to see how many tails are made and how difficult it is to avoid them.

I know you think differently and that all rods are the same no matter what action, stiffness, frequency and mass distribution they have But I notice the different feel according to what rings are fitted and really have to slow down, smoothen and lengthen my stoke with soft rods.

Cheers, Paul

Yeah, I do think differently

Just for the heck of it, could you try and cast two rods at the same time? I've seen the tails all over the place with the soft rods and brugte casters , but I've never seen a tail and a good loop when using the same input for both rods, and I'd love to learn how it would be possible when knowing how tails are made

And yes, I have done distance with the noodles, changed Stefans mind once in a shootout, when told one couldn't throw the SSSS rod for distance, too soft and too many tails... Ten minute later the backing knot on a comp MED 5 was leaving the tip ring...

Cheers
Lasse

(Would it not be better to say the fault is because the caster’s input has not matched the profile of the rod?)

Oh no, going down that path... do the manufacturers have force input to rod profile charts handy now for us all to benefit from?

Lasse Karlsson wrote:So you can have one rod that throw a tail and a other that throws a good loop for the same input, or am I understanding this wrong?

Cheers
Lasse

No Lasse... I think you are right!

In fact, I think a lot of beginners have a default input, and instead of learning to alter their cast they search for that "other" rod that fits their default and throws the good loop!

But they, and possibly you (unless you are trying to lead somewhere ), are missing some of my points.

One is that there is more to this than just the rod. There is the combination of the rod, line and fly that creates a particular system. Some of these combinations are not very challenging, like a small fluff on a MED. Others are more difficult. And, of course, there are some combinations that don't work well at all.

My main point was that, assuming the rod/line/fly combination is somewhat close to being balanced, the caster must also fit into the system. They must apply the correct force, over the right distance, and for the right amount of time, etc..

And all those things add up to the right input. And what makes it right is that it utilizes and fits the profile of the rod.

And no Lee... the manufacturers probably could not establish force input to rod profile charts as the possible combinations of lines and flies are infinite!

But I believe there are aliens from outer space who can literally cast rubber chickens on a fly rod. How do they do that except by fitting perfectly into the imperfect system?

Lasse Karlsson wrote:
Just for the heck of it, could you try and cast two rods at the same time? I've seen the tails all over the place with the soft rods and brugte casters , but I've never seen a tail and a good loop when using the same input for both rods, and I'd love to learn how it would be possible when knowing how tails are made

Lasse

Lasse,

I remember that video of casting two rods simultaneously. They were rather different rods, were they not? I do not remember what the goal was? Was it to show that both rods could create decent loops even though they were quite different actions?

So, they both had the same lines and flies... and obviously the same caster's input...

I remember that the softer rod threw a larger but decently shaped loop, although it was definitely not the best that probably could have been created by that rod alone.

My thought at the time was that the input probably matched what was necessary for both to somewhat work. Kinda like you added the two rods together and took the average.

Did they always throw decent loops? If one tailed, did they both tail?

I'm betting it did not feel like casting two rods simultaneously... it felt like casting one rod... a composite. Or no?

Hi Gary

My point was exactly that, when one rod threw a tail, so did the other, when one threw a large loop, so does the other. It’s a stable part of my mythbusting demos, which I have been doing now for 6 years. To throw a tail, you need to apply force erratic, inconsistent with a spike at some point to make the rodtip dip and then rise. Without that, No tail. Its almost impossible to tail a broomsticks, slightly easier but still almost impossible to tail handcasting. Use a bending rod, it becomes easier.

I have been accused of photoshopping the clips, that one rod just follows along with the other (two camps, one go the soft follows the stiff, the other that the stiff follows the soft...) and that I am so good that I can dampen one of the rods etc. And no, first of I don't even have a computer, second its just the same input for both, not much you can do when holding on to both is difficult (got small hands, and is a skinny mofo) in the end the thing just hammers home that a good strike is a good stroke, a bad is a bad. Regardless of the stiffness of the rod. And no rod hides your faults. What you percieve as feel might differ, but that is a different ballgame.

The only way to get really different outcmes is to either use a ridiculesly stiff rod (I demo with a very stiff 8 Wright and a noodle glassfiber 6 and use two 6 weight lines) so already outside what the cast majority would use, and you need much stiffer (have used a 12 in a pinch without much difference) that that to alter results, or use very different lengths, and throw so slow that only the longest rod have turnover. But then the excercise is rigged and not comparable, which was the point of it...

I did the excercise originalt, because I did not experience having to change anything between throwing a stiff or a soft rod, and I was consistently told (and its still in alot of tests) that I had to slow down with a soft rod, cast slower etc... Turns out its false, and logic should have shown that in the first place

Cheers
Lasse