Paul and Nick

[VGB]

Hi Paul, I know we have different students, and we are talking about different parts of learning continuum. In order to understand the advantages of visual cueing, you need to be able to discriminate between learning and performance. If you are changing a thumb position, the student is not learning a new skill, only refining an existing skill.

Yes, I do watch loops, as should the student. I also watch how the student reacts to the feedback he is receiving from the cue to see if he is making the necessary changes. I want them to be able to perform the skill when I’m not there. Do your students to use a line during lessons, if so why?

Regards

Vince

[Paul Arden]

I don’t think it works like that Mark. Otherwise you could just stand next to someone, cast together and job done. It takes a lot longer than that as we know. In fact it can take years, or indeed is a constantly ongoing process. It’s certainly part of the teaching process, but if you want to develop the couple of examples I gave, then you need to find a way of coaching that isn’t simply copy what I do as I do it.

Right, weekly long bike ride. Back later or tomorow.

Cheers, Paul

[Paul Arden]

Bike ride now. I was wondering if you could give a lesson without watching the loops? Just an interesting question. Not a judgement. Gotta shoot. Cheers, Paul

[VGB]

Cueing and deliberate practice causes neurological changes inside the student, this is not internal cueing. Although the pole dancer cues are an easier read, a paper called “ Inside the brain of an elite athlete: the neural processes that support high achievement in sports” is of a useful baseline for this discussion. The abstract describes the following:

Events like the World Championships in athletics and the Olympic Games raise the public profile of competitive sports. They may also leave us wondering what sets the competitors in these events apart from those of us who simply watch. Here we attempt to link neural and cognitive processes that have been found to be important for elite performance with computational and physiological theories inspired by much simpler laboratory tasks. In this way we hope to inspire neuroscientists to consider how their basic research might help to explain sporting skill at the highest levels of performance.

Rather than ask you to read a long detailed technical paper, I’ve copied a summary of the key points from a Neuroscience review journal, you may find interesting:

Elite athletes exhibit enhanced motor, perceptual and decision-making abilities developed over extensive periods of task-relevant practise.

Their motor acts are very precise, but are not confined to stereotypical kinematic patterns; it is the goal-relevant outcome that is controlled precisely, in line with current computational theories of motor control such as optimal feedback control.

Because sporting skills are highly complex and take years of practise, determining how learning is achieved in the setting of very delayed rewards represents a challenge for current theories of reinforcement learning.

The performance of expert athletes seems automatic, and often operates best in the absence of conscious control, but it is the level of performance, for example a new speed–accuracy trade-off, not automaticity per se, that defines expertise. The development of perceptual and motor skill correlates with structural changes in primary sensory and motor cortices, whereas functional imaging suggests a more efficient and focused use of neural resources across the brain.

Expert–novice paradigms suggest that athletes predict how events will unfold based on the movements of their opponents, and use these predictions to increase the speed and accuracy of their decisions.

The ability to make such predictions is consistent with the idea of a forward model that predicts the consequence of an opponent's actions.

The impressive ability of athletes to make good time-pressured decisions is compatible with recent models of motor decision making, which suggest that multiple motor acts are specified in parallel in sensorimotor regions of the cortex and compete through biased inhibitory connections to yield a single winning motor choice.

[Stoatstail50]

I don’t think it works like that Mark. Otherwise you could just stand next to someone, cast together and job done.

OK…my caster is already working with the line up. They’re attempting to control loop shapes. It’s not always working as they expect. This is totally normal. What is also totally normal is that they start to tense up. This is “freezing” as they try to solve the problem and it’s highly predictable.

My question to you is why, at this point, would I use synchronised movement in the lesson? I don’t have a rod in my hand, nothing, not even a parsnip. I’m doing the hippy hippy shake to one side and they do it too…So why do I do it. ?

[VGB]

Bike ride now. I was wondering if you could give a lesson without watching the loops?

I could but I’d be short changing the student. They may only be able to cast with my help and in the benign conditions of the lesson, if they couldn’t react to changes in the “goal relevant outcome”. If the student already has that capability then we are only talking about a refinement of existing skills and I’d be having a relaxing day at the office

[NM]

John,
Yes the relative line density is an important aspect when moving from T38 to the 27 gram Sea Trout floating line (ST27) event and back again. I am just back from a longer indoor Casting tournament and practice session casting the T38 for the first time in a long time. The change from ST27, which is what I mainly have been since I returned to competition casting, was initially quite difficult. Interestingly, I ended the day with a ST27 session, and I was really struggling for the first couple of casts. Everything felt so much lighter and softer than just a couple of days ago. Wide open loops and having a hard time timing my power input and rod turnover. Nothing to do with my ST27 technique not being robust I think and everything to do with the feel, and it I think it is about more than just the shoulder rotation. Things changed quite radically after the few first casts and I was then able to achieve much higher hand speed than before because of better layback. Everything feels quite differently, and better, because of that.

And yes, I agree, there’s no visual or external cues for improving layback. I have been practicing it while working on strengthening my throwing muscles by casting (FC only) against the resistance of a rubber band. Quite effective for developing the feel and right sequencing.

Nils

[NM]

Mark,
I am happy that you agree that we use all of our senses when learning and executing complex movements, including fly casting. Anything else would have been quite surprising.

Mark wrote:
Obviously, a beginner student or a relative novice has an un-enhanced feel compared to that of an elite caster. Raw feel as opposed to fully cooked feel. What feel should these students be aiming for? How do you describe it to them?

I agree with Paul that the best way for a student to build an awareness over how their body is working is to ask questions and that you as an instructor should ask those questions. Besides those mentioned by Paul, I would have the student focus on the feeling of how the line pulls on the rod tip as they start the FC and BC, and the feeling of proper line tension/contact with the line versus the feeling of slack. That feel is critical at every level of casting. I would also work on the feeling of acceleration and rod turn over. Jason is using sound images like uuUuUUPP smooooOTH to plant the right feel image in the students’ heads. I like that approach. Casting a soft rod without a line focusing on turning over the rod tip as you would do with a whip can I guess also be a useful drill for enhancing that feel. In golf you may swing really hard with a heavy club or something similar to build speed. As a side effect when I did that, I got a much better feel for the club head—it felt heavier. Very useful. Casting blindfolded would help developing feel as well. The experience Phil reports in the Blind Casting thread is quite interesting.

Best,
Nils

[NM]

Vince

You wrote:
Something Lasse pointed out a few years ago, that I have observed many times since is that many casters going from the stiff to softer gear is that their timing is off. Generally, they are reacting to the feel of the rod tip moving and not observing the line roll out".

Observing the line roll out can tell you a lot if things of what’s right or wrong in your casting stroke. That can provide useful feedback that you can use to try to correct the next cast if you have sufficient understanding of the cause-and-effect relationship of what you are seeing. That require a degree of expertise, though, that I assume many of your students do not have. A good instructor may hopefully be able to provide an efficient cue to help the student address the cause or set of causes for issues that can be identified by observing the loop. I agree that an external cue may generally be preferable, if one properly tailored to the observed problem exist. However, sometime one may not exist because the problem is related to one aspect of the movement pattern, say stance, tracking, and/or elbow position and forearm angle in accuracy casting. Then you must address that detail first, and that may require using an internal cue.

Also, it is sometimes useful to both use an internal and an external cue for fixing an issue. There is a great example of that from fixing the coming-over-the-top problem in golf in this one. https://www.mytpi.com/articles/swing/sa ... effect.%22 I have used both for my own golf practice. There are some (internet) golf coaches that are very much focused on positions while others are using more external cues. While I may prefer the latter for beginners as it helps develop a more natural swing (and fly casting stroke), I have gained from both. Some even need to have a through theoretical understanding of what's going on the and cause-effect relationships to be able to fix their problems without the help of a coach when they struggle with executing a movement out on the golf course or when fishing.

Reacting to after-the fact information such as the loop doesn’t help us fix the issue in real time. That may require focusing on and understanding feel. As explained in this excellent article:

https://coachesinsider.com/track-x-coun ... ng-events/
Understanding the appearance of the desired patterns of movement is essential to effective cuing. Understanding cause-effect relationships raises our level of coaching effectiveness. However, the most advanced and effective cuing takes into account the sensations and feelings the athlete experiences as the event is performed. …. The best cuing practices take in information based on how it looks to the coach and translate it into how it feels to the athlete.

Again, it is not about whether Method A is always better that than Method B and for all problems and for all students. It is about using all available tools that can help address the issue for that particular student.

Best,
Nils

[John Waters]

John,
Yes the relative line density is an important aspect when moving from T38 to the 27 gram Sea Trout floating line (ST27) event and back again. I am just back from a longer indoor Casting tournament and practice session casting the T38 for the first time in a long time. The change from ST27, which is what I mainly have been since I returned to competition casting, was initially quite difficult. Interestingly, I ended the day with a ST27 session, and I was really struggling for the first couple of casts. Everything felt so much lighter and softer than just a couple of days ago. Wide open loops and having a hard time timing my power input and rod turnover. Nothing to do with my ST27 technique not being robust I think and everything to do with the feel, and it I think it is about more than just the shoulder rotation. Things changed quite radically after the few first casts and I was then able to achieve much higher hand speed than before because of better layback. Everything feels quite differently, and better, because of that.

And yes, I agree, there’s no visual or external cues for improving layback. I have been practicing it while working on strengthening my throwing muscles by casting (FC only) against the resistance of a rubber band. Quite effective for developing the feel and right sequencing.

Nils

Hi Nils,

Exactly, I have Heinz Marie-Hengse visiting me for 3 weeks later this month. Whilst Heinz does a lot of sea trout fishing, he has not cast the competition 5 MED or 27 gram gear we use in the events. It will be interesting to discuss what he feels in his first sessions and what loops shapes he generates over a 3 week training. Researchers use other terms when discussing rotation but layback is a great description. I think it will become a far more common term in fly casting in the future. It's great that you are using it and more importantly, extending it.

Sweden and Norway must be congratulated on the data based, research driven fly casting programs being developed. I envy you.

John