PLEASE NOTE: In order to post on the Board you need to have registered. To register please email paul@sexyloops.com including your real name and username. Registration takes less than 24hrs, unless Paul is fishing deep in the jungle!

Changing task constraints

Moderators: Paul Arden, Bernd Ziesche, Lasse Karlsson

Post Reply
User avatar
Paul Arden
Site Admin
Posts: 19528
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
Answers: 2
Location: Belum Rainforest
Contact:

Changing task constraints

#1

Post by Paul Arden »

An excellent question here from Vince https://www.sexyloops.co.uk/theboard/vi ... 410#p62410
what is being taught by:
For example, I teach Closed Stance Accuracy, Open Stance Distance, [Belgian/Oval] and 170. I believe that the contrast between styles helps each one. I do other things too of course, particularly “breaking” a style to add other dimensions, but I find that this contrast between resolute styles to be highly beneficial,

One can also do the same thing with the “stops” ie forced stop, pull-back and stopless
I don’t know. I think it allows the student to compare and contrast different casting techniques. Maybe this helps the student to be analytical of themselves. Of course it broadens his/her skills level and helps to narrow the focus down on specific techniques.

But I think this question is really about how it works in the brain/body.

This to me is my core method of dealing with intermediate students by the way. I take their existing one-does-all style and break it into 2 and ultimately 3 techniques. If I didn’t do this I would really be wasting everyone’s time.

I can tell you how to do it, I can tell you that it works but I can’t tell you why it works. :p

It certainly interests me!

Cheers, Paul
It's an exploration; bring a flyrod.

Flycasting Definitions
User avatar
Paul Arden
Site Admin
Posts: 19528
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
Answers: 2
Location: Belum Rainforest
Contact:

Re: Changing task constraints

#2

Post by Paul Arden »

I could add perhaps, that accuracy technique teaches tracking, blocking, trajectories and loop control.

Open Stance Distance teaches weight-shift, delayed rotation and an effective haul

170 teaches “Stopless” into-the-wind casts, particularly backhand delivery, and to be “smooth”.

And each one teaches these things to the other, elevating them all.

That’s how I look at the functions. So if I want to improve an aspect in one I use the other. I believe it’s easier to make changes in a different stroke than the one we are dealing with. No idea why :D But I know it’s true.

Cheers, Paul
It's an exploration; bring a flyrod.

Flycasting Definitions
User avatar
VGB
Posts: 6128
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:04 pm
Answers: 0

Re: Changing task constraints

#3

Post by VGB »

Hi Paul

It wasn’t a deep question, I don’t have an answer myself. What was in my mind at the time was starting with the 5 essentials, how does each individual technique reinforce or compromise each one of the five? If you do elect to compromise one of the essentials, why would you do that?

Something that has struck me when teaching beginners is that if I put them in the closed stance, it makes it more difficult for them to monitor their back cast which is generally the weaker part of most peoples cast, we are not built to throw things behind us. If they cannot monitor their back cast, their tracking and timing are likely to be off. This ability to monitor the external cues given by the line is what makes structures like Lee’s triangle method so useful.

However, if I am taking someone fishing for the first time, I’ll put them in a closed stance and shorten up the line and stroke, to get a workable cast for the water in a short time. The compromise is that I’m inhibiting their progress with a longer line and I now send people away with a health warning that what I have taught has limitations. I suspect that your contrast of techniques is designed for students who have good movement control and who are competent in performing casts that demonstrate a solid foundation in the 5 essentials.

I mentioned in the other thread that I spend a lot of time in small streams breaking the 180 because it’s essential for that style of fishing. Much of the time, you have to contrive casts and for that you need a good grounding in the essentials and understand how far you can take them before the cast breaks down due to physics or a lack of ability. The constraints are that I have a short rod to give me room to make the cast. Often a light line cast at short range to avoid spooking the fish and operating in a confined space due to the banks. Perhaps you are doing something similar that is better suited to your environment and equipment constraints?

If that analysis sounds a bit familiar, it’s because it’s based on the caster, equipment and environment definition that I mentioned to John and is derived from something called the Constraints Led Approach that has become prevalent in sports science and coaching. For the caster, you do need to delve into the headology and Mark is streets ahead of me on that, also the biomechanics which is John’s field of interest. I think most of us are familiar with the effects of equipment and the environment. But by breaking it into 3 constituent parts, I think it gives me some levers to pull.

My interest is that I want to understand why what we teach works and be able to manipulate the techniques to better tailor it for individuals. Equally, I want to know if what I teach has a shelf life that enables the student to reproduce it a week or a month later, or it’s confusing performance on the day with learning. I’m already a knackered old shit and I don’t have decades to become a half decent instructor :D :D :D

Regards

Vince
Casting instruction - making simple things complicated since 1765

https://www.sexyloops.com/index.php/ps/ ... f-coaching
User avatar
Paul Arden
Site Admin
Posts: 19528
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 11:20 am
Answers: 2
Location: Belum Rainforest
Contact:

Re: Changing task constraints

#4

Post by Paul Arden »

Hi Vince,

The 5 essentials are not core for me. Don’t get me wrong. I think they are a wonderful tool for instructors and the variable casting arc can be a lightbulb moment for an intermediate caster. But I don’t structure lessons around them.

I see them as “theory” but I’m much more interested in teaching “movement”.

I agree that the backcast is hard to learn and that it is easier to learn timing by watching it. It’s for this reason that I also start with the Triangle Method (that and we use the same method for fail-safe double haul teaching, and if we start students this way we can often get the Double Haul in place very early on — double bonus!).

However what I don’t like about watching the backcast from a side position, is how the body moves the rod. Instead of the shoulder naturally “blocking” the forearm on the backcast, and the elbow, shoulder and knee all aligned on the forward cast, we have the student casting parallel to his shoulders (or a variation of this) which makes consistency very difficult particularly when not watching the backcast and critically, it fails to make use of the shoulder in the up/down motion (Ie Flexion/Extension), which for me is the essence of good form.

I also don’t like this “half open” stance which is not really one thing and not another, but most casters appear to use for all their fishing, both short and long, which when combined with horizontal shoulder abduction and adduction is what we often see in untrained casters.

So while I certainly use it to gather the benefits, I'm very quick to say that this is a drill. I would say that less than 10% of my students who are experienced fishermen have used Closed Stance. And almost all that do have been taught. I test for it! I put targets out and ask them to cast at them while I “set up”.

What I find interesting is that Closed Stance Accuracy appears to help Open Stance Distance backcasts, despite the fact that they are different. And to the extent that if a student is having a problem with tracking in Open Stance, switching to closed and then back to open can fix it.

Breaking 180 is always fun. It only works (lands straight) with a relatively short line of course! In fact breaking/manipulating all the 5Es leads to interesting casts. That would make for an interesting 5Es lesson.

The way I look at all of these things, is that I ask myself where do I want the student to end up? For me at a minimum that means Accuracy and Distance strokes, Roll and Jump Roll. It may also mean the 170 (Saltwater). It might mean the inclusion of Presentation Casts and possibly the Spey cast family. When I have these objectives in place, and I know that I have a course of lessons, then it makes life easier. It also makes life interesting too, because I find that there are different routes that can be taken to reach the same destination. Which enables me to structure my course. And as unbelievable and surprising as it sounds, I plan my lessons :D

Anyway back to the original topic; there must be something when we contrast different techniques that helps cement the respective components of each. This must be why contrasting Closed Accuracy against Open Distance is so effective.

Cheers, Paul
It's an exploration; bring a flyrod.

Flycasting Definitions
User avatar
VGB
Posts: 6128
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:04 pm
Answers: 0

Re: Changing task constraints

#5

Post by VGB »

Hi Paul
Anyway back to the original topic; there must be something when we contrast different techniques that helps cement the respective components of each. This must be why contrasting Closed Accuracy against Open Distance is so effective.
I thought I had covered this on the other thread but teaching various techniques makes for a more robust and adaptable performer. The student is better able to adapt to changes in environment because they have learnt a variety of solutions to a problem. Once they have the fine motor control, it is much easier to make small adaptations to existing techniques.

Off teaching and it’s-1C. Today we will be learning about individual movement constraints due to thick clothing :ninja:

Back later for your other points

Vince
Casting instruction - making simple things complicated since 1765

https://www.sexyloops.com/index.php/ps/ ... f-coaching
User avatar
VGB
Posts: 6128
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:04 pm
Answers: 0

Re: Changing task constraints

#6

Post by VGB »

Hi Paul

A blue sky day, a great day to teach in winter.
The 5 essentials are not core for me. Don’t get me wrong. I think they are a :D wonderful tool for instructors and the variable casting arc can be a lightbulb moment for an intermediate caster. But I don’t structure lessons around them.

I see them as “theory” but I’m much more interested in teaching “movement”.
That wasn’t what I was trying to get to, I was trying to understand was what the aim of your lesson was, what behaviours or technique you are trying to teach or reinforce?

I don’t see the 5E as theory, SLP, increased arc and power are all products of movement. No slack line and pause are feedback. Open loop movement usually results in a fire or serious injury :D
However what I don’t like about watching the backcast from a side position, is how the body moves the rod. Instead of the shoulder naturally “blocking” the forearm on the backcast, and the elbow, shoulder and knee all aligned on the forward cast, we have the student casting parallel to his shoulders (or a variation of this) which makes consistency very difficult particularly when not watching the backcast and critically, it fails to make use of the shoulder in the up/down motion (Ie Flexion/Extension), which for me is the essence of good form.
If you are trying to teach movement why are you eliminating the body’s input? Going back to my picture of the stream, is it good form to put the fly in a tree every time? Whilst, I appreciate that there are ways of using good form to recruit the muscle groups to avoid injury, I would suggest that engaging body movement in the cast will help achieve this.

How would you teach CI Task 6 based on the shoulder motion? (Casting to a distance of 40 feet 12.2 meters), make a series of casts beginning with the rod vertical and progressing to horizontal over a series of 6 to 8 casts. The candidate will make two false casts at each position, using the rod hand only.)
I would say that less than 10% of my students who are experienced fishermen have used Closed Stance. And almost all that do have been taught. I test for it! I put targets out and ask them to cast at them while I “set up”.
It must be a cultural thing because I would say that it is completely the opposite here, 90% are taught closed stance. As a matter of interest, how are you laying out your targets?

Regards

Vince
Casting instruction - making simple things complicated since 1765

https://www.sexyloops.com/index.php/ps/ ... f-coaching
User avatar
VGB
Posts: 6128
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:04 pm
Answers: 0

Re: Changing task constraints

#7

Post by VGB »

“Having multiple solutions creates the advantageous state of redundancy. We are not reliant on any one solution. Others are waiting in the wings to do the same job. We can adapt. We can match the variability in the context Bernstein identified with the variability in our movement solutions. If the ball Rafael Nadal is about to play goes in a direction that doesn’t allow for a typical backhand, he has the “degenerate” between the legs shot ready to step in and get the ball back over the net. Same successful outcome under different conditions because of different (not the same, repeatable) solutions.

Variability is a beneficial design feature that allows us to adapt and keep achieving our goals. It also seems to help prevent us from getting hurt. Variability as a Pain Reduction & Injury Prevention Mechanism Why do we get injured when playing sports? The traditional view is that injuries occur for two reasons: you are doing it wrong and/ or you are doing it too much. “Don’t let your knees go past your toes”. “Your shoulder is flying open”, aka you are not using the correct technique. “The pitcher threw too many pitches in the game”. “You were trying to lift too much weight”. In other words, you are overloading the system. Are there any alternatives to preventing injury than just chasing the unicorn of repeatability and telling athletes to do less?

In 2004, James proposed an interesting twist on these traditional explanations for sports injuries13 . The “variability-overuse hypothesis” starts with the same basic concept: Repeated application of load eventually leads to tissue breakdown and injury. Don’t do it too much. But then it adds a new twist that fits nicely with the theme of this chapter: this breakdown will occur when there is not enough variability in movement to allow for adaptation. So, the problem is not that you are not doing it the one, correct way. In fact, trying to do that, trying to have a highly consistent, repeatable movement is likely to increase the chance of injury, not decrease it.”

— How We Learn to Move: A Revolution in the Way We Coach & Practice Sports Skills by Rob Gray
https://amzn.eu/5rZ30M6
Casting instruction - making simple things complicated since 1765

https://www.sexyloops.com/index.php/ps/ ... f-coaching
John Waters
Posts: 2147
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:16 pm
Answers: 0

Re: Changing task constraints

#8

Post by John Waters »

VGB wrote: Fri Jan 14, 2022 4:04 pm
“Having multiple solutions creates the advantageous state of redundancy. We are not reliant on any one solution. Others are waiting in the wings to do the same job. We can adapt. We can match the variability in the context Bernstein identified with the variability in our movement solutions. If the ball Rafael Nadal is about to play goes in a direction that doesn’t allow for a typical backhand, he has the “degenerate” between the legs shot ready to step in and get the ball back over the net. Same successful outcome under different conditions because of different (not the same, repeatable) solutions.

Variability is a beneficial design feature that allows us to adapt and keep achieving our goals. It also seems to help prevent us from getting hurt. Variability as a Pain Reduction & Injury Prevention Mechanism Why do we get injured when playing sports? The traditional view is that injuries occur for two reasons: you are doing it wrong and/ or you are doing it too much. “Don’t let your knees go past your toes”. “Your shoulder is flying open”, aka you are not using the correct technique. “The pitcher threw too many pitches in the game”. “You were trying to lift too much weight”. In other words, you are overloading the system. Are there any alternatives to preventing injury than just chasing the unicorn of repeatability and telling athletes to do less?

In 2004, James proposed an interesting twist on these traditional explanations for sports injuries13 . The “variability-overuse hypothesis” starts with the same basic concept: Repeated application of load eventually leads to tissue breakdown and injury. Don’t do it too much. But then it adds a new twist that fits nicely with the theme of this chapter: this breakdown will occur when there is not enough variability in movement to allow for adaptation. So, the problem is not that you are not doing it the one, correct way. In fact, trying to do that, trying to have a highly consistent, repeatable movement is likely to increase the chance of injury, not decrease it.”

— How We Learn to Move: A Revolution in the Way We Coach & Practice Sports Skills by Rob Gray
https://amzn.eu/5rZ30M6
Hi Vince,

It all depends on the objective the athlete or coach has for the training segment. If it is to target a body segment which is fundamental to the athlete's success then specificity, not variability will be the better strategy. That includes the pairing of muscles. In that case, issues like intensity and frequency need to be considered because overloading will be the cause of injury. The type of sport is also a factor in how variability is used.

John
User avatar
VGB
Posts: 6128
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:04 pm
Answers: 0

Re: Changing task constraints

#9

Post by VGB »

Hi John

I can’t think of a fishing situation where specificity would apply.

Regards

Vince
Casting instruction - making simple things complicated since 1765

https://www.sexyloops.com/index.php/ps/ ... f-coaching
John Waters
Posts: 2147
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:16 pm
Answers: 0

Re: Changing task constraints

#10

Post by John Waters »

Hi Vince,

No I agree, in fishing you can always get another cast if the accuracy or distance technique did not deliver the perfect result and the same can be said for the movement employed with the fishing cast. Variations in the rod arm elbow alignment is an example, 10 fishers will have 10 variations. I can think of casting coaching sessions that will be specific to a movement or joint positioning, it depends on the caster's objective. Rod arm elbow alignment is an example of specificity for tournament accuracy casters and coaches.

John
Post Reply

Return to “Teaching”