Under estimating translational movement

[Paul Arden]

Hi Phil,

the rod does straighten from butt to tip and on a powerful cast often (as in your picture) part of the rod will pass through “straight position” before the rod tip, creating an S-shape.

I agree that thrust feels like pushing the bend out of the rod, or maintaining bend for longer. I suppose it’s because we are still adding force while the rod is unloading and we feel the resistance. The difference you may be feeling is the difference between bending the rod (early) and the rod unbending (later).

Cheers, Paul

[Mangrove Cuckoo]

Hey Phil!

I think I feel your pinch as sort of a tip collapse due to a non-smooth application of power done deliberately?

I'm all for teaching beginners to be smooth, but there are many good uses of "errors" when they are done on purpose for deliberate reasons. In this case I find that late increase in translation, or thrust, seems to allow me to shape the loop.

As for translation, I think a thrust into the butt section , early, before the rod is perpendicular, can have some interesting applications also. Of course, at that point, continuous acceleration is no longer possible. But that is not all that different than stopless, except that it is just done much earlier.

[John Waters]

Hello

When I am throwing my best, there feels like there is a pinch between the rod tip and the rod as the bend works out towards the tip. (Seems like I have been told the bend doesn't progress out the rod that way, but that's what it feels like). When I'm not throwing as well, it feels like my timing is off and the entire rod straightens at the same time. Does any of this sound familiar? In order to get the feel of the pinch, it seems like I need to have some translation or forward rod thrust at the end of fast acceleration phase of the cast. If you use the land or cloud in the background of pictures 2 and 3 below as reference, you can see the small amount of translation. If I apply power too soon, I am unable to create the pinch.

Note-John-body rotation seems to help me achieve better timing for this part of the cast.

Any of this sound familiar to anyone?

sl 1228a.jpgsl 1228b.jpgsl 1228c.jpg

Hi Phil,

I agree with your description of the rod straightening at the same time. It does sound familiar to me. I don't favour conscious translation of the rod hand in front of the shoulder as a source of tip, and hence, line speed. The hand does move in front of the shoulder but IMHO, that upward and forward movement is a follow through of the body segment rotation that is set up when the hand is behind the shoulder. Any gap between the deceleration of one segment and the acceleration of the next segment negatively impacts distance. That gap, or lag between the activation of segments, for example the hip and shoulder, or shoulder and elbow is the reason we feel that disruption to the accelerating rod tip. The effectiveness of that acceleration is sourced to minimising that gap or lag in body segment rotation. We use a number terms for that gap in activation, timing, coordination, smoothness being three. IMHO, the greater the lag between segment rotational activation, the greater disconnection we feel. That disconnection can be felt in the body and or in the rod and both result in lack of performance.
I think your observation about "body rotation seems to help me achieve better timing for this part of the cast" sums up fly distance casting. It's all about attaining your highest possible hand speed (rod and haul) in the shortest possible time interval. There are two primary casting strokes that generate impulse, comparing the US casters to European casters of fly distance is an interesting exercise.

As to which is the better......?

John

[George C]

What also is muddied into the mix is power application. Are we applying translational force, torque, and at what point do we rapidly accelerate?

Finally both 2&3 are delayed rotation. But I think 3 is better than 2.
IMG_6237.jpeg

Hi Paul
There is a lot going on here.

For instance, why is example 3 called delayed rotation when rod angle starts changing at the same time as in the first example? Clearly rotation itself has not been delayed. Rather it seems that what we are trying to delay is the peak rotational acceleration until the rod position is more favorable for achieving a SLP. But this could be true in example 1 and 2 as well. The difference being where in the course of translation is this vertical rod position achieved and what is gained or lost by moving that position sooner or later.

Likewise I struggle with the term 'power application'. The whole mantra about 'no power before noon' seems disingenuous (although admittedly very helpful). By the time the rod is vertical it is already well bent and mostly loaded. Clearly a lot of power has been applied long before 'noon'. Indeed, is more power required to get from start to vertical or from vertical to stop? I don't know, but I do know I am not conscious of applying much torque before vertical.....even though I clearly am. I feel like I'm pulling the rod forward and then rotating it, but in fact the translational movement itself (forward weight shift) seems to initiate a major part of rotation through anatomical position change of spine and shoulder (and elbow drive) without me noticing or thinking about it. Consequently when I think about rotation timing I think I'm actually thinking about when it is safe to apply maximal conscious torque without imparting misdirected upward momentum to the line. Seems like what needs to be delayed is not rotation or actual power application but instead the final conscious effort to maximize rotational acceleration.

There is another interesting aspect to the translation/rotation relationship. It involves the effect of pull down (which slows translation but maximizes torque and rotational contribution) followed by swoop/thrust (which reaccelerates translation? ) vs foregoing pulldown (and giving up the extra torque it provides) in order to maximize translational contribution (both direct and indirect via augmented haul) to line speed through rapid arm extension as unloading occurs. I experiment both ways and find with heavier line weights I need to do the former but with lighter weights the latter works best. Is this consistent with your experience?

Thanks for your thoughts and sorry if I'm being tedious.
George

[Paul Arden]

There is a lot to unpack in there too, George!!

I see 3 as “delayed” because it’s modified from 1 which most untrained distance casters do and how most of us trained casters throw at rings. I used to think it was 2 but that creates a huge dangle, or can do.

I agree there is a huge bend in the rod at rod butt perpendicular, which I think says quite a lot about how little effort it takes to bend the rod. But if instead of rod loading we think of tip path I think this helps, me anyway.

There is a fair amount of Swoop in my distance stroke here. But it hasn’t always been the way. I’ll get some recent video of Rick Hartman because he is not doing this and is throwing huge distances.

I differ here from John maybe or at least I think so. John talks about maximising force, speed (and other things), whereas I’m more about emphasising the integrity of the loop (and carry length) as priorities first. I’m sure we both end up in the same place, more or less, and it’s just emphasising different things in preference to others. I definitely do not cast at 100% effort. Haul yes. Rod no. That’s not to say I don’t break rods because that’s a speciality of mine

As a result of some of Merlin and Gordy’s analysis I’ve started thinking that our key moment for applying the Hit through Torque, as well as the rapid acceleration of the haul, is MCL and immediately after, as opposed to just prior to RSP. This would also align to the “cast and release” ideas that Rasmus used to discuss.

Back later. Snakehead are talking to me!

Cheers, Paul

[Mangrove Cuckoo]

Hey Paul!

"Cast and release" rings a bell for me. It may imply something similar to what I think I have been playing with lately?

I don't remember coming across that on SL (but then I have a problem with memory sometimes... well... actually quite often )

Where might I find more info????

Thanks!

[George C]

Hi Guys
I see two different means of generating tip speed here.
Rod position for both casters during slide/drag is very similar up to the start of rotation.
Phil and Paul (at that time) seem to be optimizing torque over hand speed (velocity towards target) during rotation. The blue line marking the rod grip suggests Paul used loads of pull down at the expense of forward translation as he generates tip speed.

This person (from the video) instead uses much less pull down (there is a bit) but seems to maintain translational hand speed throughout rotation.

This suggests that tip speed, which is generated by a combination of translation, torque, and rod unloading can be optimized by either prioritizing torque over translation, or prioritizing translation over torque. Do I have this wrong and if not, what are the pros and cons of each?

[John Waters]

There is a lot to unpack in there too, George!!

I see 3 as “delayed” because it’s modified from 1 which most untrained distance casters do and how most of us trained casters throw at rings. I used to think it was 2 but that creates a huge dangle, or can do.

I agree there is a huge bend in the rod at rod butt perpendicular, which I think says quite a lot about how little effort it takes to bend the rod. But if instead of rod loading we think of tip path I think this helps, me anyway.

Paul_Angles.jpeg

There is a fair amount of Swoop in my distance stroke here. But it hasn’t always been the way. I’ll get some recent video of Rick Hartman because he is not doing this and is throwing huge distances.

I differ here from John maybe or at least I think so. John talks about maximising force, speed (and other things), whereas I’m more about emphasising the integrity of the loop (and carry length) as priorities first. I’m sure we both end up in the same place, more or less, and it’s just emphasising different things in preference to others. I definitely do not cast at 100% effort. Haul yes. Rod no. That’s not to say I don’t break rods because that’s a speciality of mine

As a result of some of Merlin and Gordy’s analysis I’ve started thinking that our key moment for applying the Hit through Torque, as well as the rapid acceleration of the haul, is MCL and immediately after, as opposed to just prior to RSP. This would also align to the “cast and release” ideas that Rasmus used to discuss.

Back later. Snakehead are talking to me!

Cheers, Paul

You are correct about loop shape Paul, and are also correct for the MED event about carry length. I view the distance delivery stroke in two segments, the hand moving towards the shoulder and the hand moving away from the shoulder and seek to have the rod hand move forward on an inclining path. I used to move my hand in a V shape, or swoop, but no longer do. I think that it slows hand speed. I want both my rod hand and haul hand to attain maximum velocity, and you are correct, that statement just reflects a different emphasis in generating line speed. The proximal input to the stroke happens when the rod hand is moving towards the shoulder and that is what I now focus on. I agree with your application of Daniel and Gordy's analysis, it was a breakthrough of me. I try and do the same. Your expression "cast and release" is excellent. I have not heard that before. I may be incorrect but I view it as being similar to the key term "stretch and release", used in other sports. I focus on the body "stretch" happening before the hand moves towards the shoulder and the release swinging the elbow and hand over the shoulder.

This is a really interesting discussion,

John

[John Waters]

This suggests that tip speed, which is generated by a combination of translation, torque, and rod unloading can be optimized by either prioritizing torque over translation, or prioritizing translation over torque. Do I have this wrong and if not, what are the pros and cons of each?

Hi George,

I think that is an excellent summary of what the videos show. There are a number of biomechanical principles applicable to sport, and stability, maximum force, maximum velocity, rotational motion and linear motion all apply to fly distance casting. How we apply them is the challenge for both instructors and casters.

John

[Paul Arden]

Hi George,

My issues with trying to turn Slide into Drag is we often see this with the haul:

IMG_6262.jpeg (44.02 KiB) Viewed 159 times

Compared to what I try to achieve which is this:

IMG_6261.jpeg (94.19 KiB) Viewed 159 times

The top is a haul predominantly driven from the shoulder whereas the bottom is from the elbow. I find I can generate more speed from the elbow.

Cheers, Paul