Tailing Loops vs. Rod Action?

[Torsten]

Hi Lasse,

one question is of course what we see as a significant difference - using the "Rosetta Stone" from https://www.common-cents.info/part3.pdf for your example:
Line No. #5, ERN 5.5, DBI 1685 grains
Line No. #6, ERN 6.5, DBI 1973 grains

the test weight difference is in this case 17% - not really much and I'm sure you won't see a significant difference on video. The stiffness difference needs to be larger, IMHO I'd guess at least 50%. I did once a scatter plot of recommended line weight vs. ERN vs. AA, the overlapping zones are actually quite large:
(the data came from the CCS database)

the question from the OP was

Do you believe there is a correlation between the action of the rod and the likelihood of a beginner/intermediate caster throwing tailing loops?

Answering the question is in my opinion actually pretty difficult, because influenced by many variables - for instance "action" of the fly rod depends not just on the stiffness but also on the taper (-> the nonlinearity of the stiffness) and the mass distribution. I've read once from a finish Spey casting guy that they prefer rods with a low AA for long belly spey lines because rods with a tip action or high AA produce more likely tailing loops - so another topic to investigate.
If you want to test the influence of the overall stiffness, you'd have to keep the other variables like taper and weight distribution constant.

Greetings,
Torsten

[VGB]

Answering the question is in my opinion actually pretty difficult

I would suggest that 100% of tails are caused by the caster

[Merlin]

An example of a good input on 3 different rods (all 905): no discernible tail along the trajectory (no dip). Now the challenge is to create a bad input for the same three rods and see which one tails first

I do not think one can get something from CCS data on this point

Merlin

[VGB]

Now the challenge is to create a bad input for the same three rods and see which one tails first

And then verifying the model outcome

[Merlin]

Same exercise but the input is changed: les shoulder, less elbow, more and earlier wrist. The picture needs to be magnified to see what happens:

The graphite fast tip action rod exhibits a wavy trajectory, and it is the same for the glass rod. The mid fast graphite rod has a stronger tip, and keeps a straighter trajectory. This is in line with Torsten’s comment about tip action Spey rods and tailing tendency. The same magnified picture for the first simulation exercise: much smoother trajectories.

First parameter for tails remains the caster, and under some circumstances, rods with stiffer tips withstand better a non optimized input which can lead to tailing.

Merlin

[VGB]

How many beginners do we think can produce accurate movements of particular joints on demand?

[Merlin]

Hi Vince

I’m not sure to understand your point. There is no need to try imposing rotations at joints to beginners. I speak of a computer exercise to compare controlled situations, and get rid of human variations, no more. Sometimes I wonder if a better practical comparison could be obtained by using one rod in each hand instead of tying two rods together. OK you need to practice casting with both hands but I guess smart casters can do it.

With their pros and cons the casting models I use allow comparisons “everything else being equal”. The outcome may not be exact (it is not I’m sure), but the interesting point is the relative comparison in between situations.

The first exercise was done with an input designed from a record of a cast performed by Jason, so it is supposed to be fine and well optimized for commercial rods, and the model seems to agree.

To try inducing a tailing behavior in the second exercise (up and down tip trajectory), I considered a typical behavior of beginners: too much wrist, too soon, and kept the overall casting arc value to stay on “everything else being equal”. The timing remains constant because of the shoulder / elbow motions which last longer than the wrist one in the first exercise, although I shifted the wrist motion earlier by 70 milliseconds. I then played with the amplitude of shoulder / elbow and wrist inputs to get the same arc value with realistic figures.

This second input is then more representative of a beginner’s cast, by comparison to Jason’s cast. And it does induce a tailing behavior of some rods under the chosen conditions (the various parameters involved, like the carry for example: 14 grams for all runs for 905 rods).

I did not use hauling on purpose since we already explored this topic and confirmed that a tailing behavior of the tip can easily be obtained from an early haul. The reason is to focus on rods first, not on all casting parameters. A “wristy” cast with a soon haul is a nice receipt to get tails at once I guess.

It is interesting to note that for the tailing conditions, the best line speed is obtained with the fastest rod, but that the lowest one comes from the mid fast graphite rod, the glass rod benefiting from a rather large inertial effect.

At the end of the day, one can find no significant differences in between rods under specific circumstances (fine cast). One may find some in case the cast is not properly performed (typical beginner’s cast), and this may be magnified by typical rod actions (e.g. tip action rods and long lines). There is likely no universal rule saying that one gets more tails with a butt action rod versus a tip action rod, it is all in the cast.

I did a computer test in the past, with rods of various speed/stiffness and a given mass, just as if I could modify the fibers modulus only. There is a clear trend for increasing tailing with increasing load on slow rods, and one gets a load limit sooner with a slow rod by comparison to a fast one. That could be an explanation for assimilating slow butt action with tailing trend. That does not preclude the fact that you can get tails with fast action rods and an inappropriate input for such rods (e.g. the Spey cast issue mentioned by Torsten).

Merlin

[VGB]

Hi Daniel

speak of a computer exercise to compare controlled situations, and get rid of human variations, no more.

I was trying to relate your answer to the question which was about how humans react to the equipment.

I did a computer test in the past, with rods of various speed/stiffness and a given mass, just as if I could modify the fibers modulus only. There is a clear trend for increasing tailing with increasing load on slow rods, and one gets a load limit sooner with a slow rod by comparison to a fast one. That could be an explanation for assimilating slow butt action with tailing trend

An interesting point is one that Lasse made some time ago about less experienced casters of bamboo and some glass rods, that they cue from the movement of the rod tip and not the line. Now that I have looked for it, I have seen that this behaviour throws their timing out and is probably a major contributor to the prevalence of tailing with slower rods. Having observed a few people that learnt to cast on bamboo, none of them tailed stiffer rods. My own observation of a sample of 1 person (me) is that I developed a greater range of accurate movement with practice. I have a few guys that I am mentoring and have observed the same process occurring but I suspect that people who cast bamboo well already have that behaviour engrained as a default casting action.

Vince