Tracking and Loop planes

[Paul Arden]

How do you define “poor” tracking, Bernd? I have straight and curved. If curved tracking is as intended then it’s good right?

[Bernd Ziesche]

Tracking = keep the rod in plane and one plane only.
I use this concept for teaching wide to tight loops towards a target. Proper tracking = small deviation, poor tracking = more deviation. Many casters curve the rod to the inner side near the end of the back cast movement. Poor tracking.
If I want to move my rod along a curved surface, then I perform poor tracking on purpose and most likely would not use the tracking concept here.
It's the same as I wouldn't use a partially straight tip path concept (meant for tight loops), when I need my leader to pile up by using an open loop.
Or I wouldn't use smooth acceleration in a Svirgolato where I need a strong wave in the fly-leg.
Every concept has it's limits.
But for avg. casting towards a target tracking is pretty useful for me.
To set up a curved surface as a reference seems tough anyway. Most ppl. can visualize a flat surface (a plane) with my help. But a specifically curved surface?
Doesn't seem very plausible to me. I'd put it different. Also tracking always was connected to something straight. So I keep that part.

[Bernd Ziesche]

The surface of a sphere is a plane.

Well, there was a time, when those ppl. claiming the earth to be a sphere (and not a part of* plane) were burnt. But that time is long gone, I thought.

*"part of" because a plane is flat and endless per definition.

[Paul Arden]

IMG_7002.jpeg (32.18 KiB) Viewed 248 times

Lots of uses for this, but for the loop to be a different plane to the rod, then it normally requires curved tracking.

Cheers, Paul

[Mangrove Cuckoo]

Sorry guys but y'all (or at least some of ya) have lost me!

"Tracking" is about the rod staying in one plane throughout the stroke???

In that case, what three points are you choosing to define the plane? It seems to me that two of the points must be low in the rod?

Isn't it more about how the rod tip "tracks" - as in plane toward the target?

Lets say three points determine a plane, as I was taught, and I choose those three points to be the target, the rod tip, and the fly. Then I can put the fly on the target, from a horizontal cast, with either a rounded vertical loop (aka "normal"), a pointed loop, or an underslung loop. (I practice this all the time btw.) What I have to do is keep the tip in the plane that the target and the fly also define.

But I must move the rod through different planes.

There are actually very few times when I can imagine the rod being in that same plane, like tuck casts and curves.

Do I have this mixed up?

[Paul Arden]

I agree with most of that Gary. The difference is tracking for you is in the loop plane, for others it’s casting/rod plane. For those of us who can have curved planes then it must be flat. For Euclidean geometrists then it need only be cast “in plane”.

You curve the rod path in three dimensions to create straight tracking in the loop plane. I curve tracking to create a loop plane out of plane of the rod. We do the same thing when casting of course, only we label it differently.

I wonder what other view points will come next?

I think that they are all correct incidentally. And it’s interesting to see different opinions.

Cheers, Paul

[Bernd Ziesche]

then it normally requires curved tracking.

I know Jeff's fine article well, mate. If you use straight tracking and curved tracking, then tracking is just another word for rod movement. I then don't see the point in using that term.
If you define it with straight as we always did, it can't be curved. Sounds like a curved straight line. Oxymoron they call it, I think.
The point you missed, is that a plane is a flat surface, always. Sorry, but that we can't change.

[Bernd Ziesche]

Hi Gary,
In my view you have mixed a few things. Let me offer a visualizing:
You are casting next to a wall. That wall is not vertical, but tilted 20 degrees to the side. The wall has a flat surface, no curves, bumps or anything.
When you cast, you move your rod along that wall and keep the distance wall to rod constant at any time during the cast as well as for every part of the rod.
You can vary the length and direction of the rod hand path. And you can vary the angle of rotation and it's orientation. Thus you can vary line speed, loop shape and trajectory. At any time you will keep to move the rod the closest possible in direction to target. That's what tracking is about to me.

Now when you want to move your rod along a curved wall (surface) for special reason, than you don't want to train tracking of course.

The 3 points you can put at any place on that wall to define the position of the wall in space, just not all 3 in a straight line.

This way to control the cast is one of the key points in distance casting and most casts towards a target. It's usually the most efficient way.

Now if you want a term for moving the rod along all kind of surfaces like flat, curved, angled or whatever: rod movement.
Does that make sense?
Regards
Bernd

[VGB]

Thus you can vary line speed, loop shape and trajectory. At any time you will keep to move the rod the closest possible in direction to target. That's what tracking is about to me.

I don’t want to hit the target with the rod but the fly.

Despite that thought, I would question the point of the thread for instructional purposes if a gaggle of intructors are struggling to transmit a vision of the desired outcome between themselves. The students have a lot more pressing needs than trying to understand the definition of a geometric construct.

If it’s really that complex, then I would ditch the explanation.

Regards

Vince

[Graeme H]

...

But I must move the rod through different planes.

There are actually very few times when I can imagine the rod being in that same plane, like tuck casts and curves.

Do I have this mixed up?

Hi Gary,

I think you do have it mixed up. Here's a really simple visualisation of the plane the rod is moving in:

The floor in your living room is a horizontal plane. Lay the rod on the floor. Now, holding the reel seat, rotate the rod along the floor.

You've just rotated the rod within a horizontal plane.

If you hold the rod against the wall and rotate the rod along the wall, you're rotating the rod within a vertical plane.

When we cast, we generally have an inclined plane that the rod stays within, but there are times when we don't follow a plane but make a somewhat curved, nearly planar path.

From my point of view, the rod tip path does not need to be within the same (true) plane as the rod. A vertical loop with a nearly horizontal rod plane is one such case. A horizontal loop with a nearly vertical rod is another. The plane the rod tip occupies may not have the same orientation as the rest of the rod's range of movement.

Paul has a good lesson for students learning the snake roll. I can't remember his exact wording, but the concept stuck with me: Imagine you have a whiteboard that is aligned with the target to one side. If you look along the white board, you'd see the fish. To get the snake roll to work, you need to draw an oval on the whiteboard with your rod tip.

What this concept is illustrating is that the rod tip needs to occupy the plane that the target (fish) is in, regardless of the plane the rod itself occupies. Most casts are not as extreme as the snake roll, but we still want the rod tip aimed at the target so that the fly is also aimed at the target.

Cheers,
Graeme