The Board

Hi, I have a few Zoom students who more often than not train with weighted flies, sometimes of crab fly type weight, or alternatively Clousers. Simple to do; just carefully cut the hook bend away from the shank.

Of course it’s not without risk and means eye protection is essential at all times (never a bad idea anyway, since flailing mono can also cause problems) — also you really can’t push things to the max without risk to the rod tip. Normally about two to four weeks out from a destination trip I will have all my students do this. It is very important.

I was wondering if it is commonly recommended to practise with weighted flies where you are? It’s not something I’ve encountered very often in the past, without prompting. However something has changed somewhere, particularly for these SW guys.

My only reservation is that when I explore new movement variations then rod tip/line collisions will occur. And so I explore without the weight first. Right now I probably spend 80% of my practise time with a popper and 20% with fluff, but in the past it would have been 80% with fluff. What are your guidelines for the proportion on training time that should be done with and without weight on the end of the leader?

Cheers, Paul

I don’t generally, but did before I went to NZ when Chris Dore suggested I may need to cast double tungsten nymphs, off the wrong shoulder into the wind…. Not something I need to do at home
Makes complete sense to practice whatever casts you are going to have to need for your fishing situation

It’s something that has bothered me for a while. I teach beginners with fluff, then take them to the river and put a nymph on to give them the best possible chance but the change of constraints throws them. I’ve been considering teaching with split shot instead of fluff but it’s a bit out there and I would need to rethink my lesson plans.

Regards

Vince

I used a tungsten nymph with the bend of the hook cut off.

I also practiced casting on a car park with a ‘euro’ 30’ chameleon leader and tungsten nymph, which is massively different to fly line and leader.

Hi Paul

To me it makes good sense to practice my casting using flies with the bend cut off. In fact, it makes so much sense, that I hardly ever use a wool fluff anymore when I’m on the lawn practicing.

And so, I have a small box with a selection of different flies with the bend cut off, that I can easily keep in my pocket when I’m practicing. I have everything from dries, to small streamers and weighted nymphs, depending on what type of fishing I’m practicing for.

When I’m practicing with my DH rod over water (different types of Spey and Roll casts), I usually tie on a weighted tube fly and a normal hook, like the ones I usually fish with.

That’s how I prefer to do my practice.

Cheers
Bendix

Paul,

I liken fluff casting to book learning... its informative and a great place to start.

However, I find it is actually a poor choice for training for the types of fishing in South Florida. So, I suggest to my students that they cease fluff casting and use emasculated practice flies that are similar to the ones they plan to fish with - when they are getting ready for a trip.

You mentioned heavily weighted flies, but there are also large but light bulky flies, and soggy soaked large flies. None of them cast like fluff. And each may require a cast that has a particular and/or very different application or goal: shoreline accuracy, long distance water coverage, minimal impact, etc..

To answer your question... I recommend 100% of the time should be relegated to casting non-fluff during the period of practice before an upcoming trip. They can go back to casting fluff to experiment, learn, or troubleshoot their cast... or when there is no reason to practice other than for the enjoyment of casting.

Gary
(not a fluff fan)

I just remembered... at the last show I attended, when I asked to try 10 wt saltwater rod I was handed the pre-rigged demo that had a dramatically forward weighted line, a short leader... and a fluff. That was so absurd - to the point of being completely stupid.

It certainly is an interesting one. I think there is an additional factor involved which is how often does the angler fish and how often train casting? Familiarity with the appropriate tackle is very important.

For me I also like taking the flies off and playing. And would argue that both are important for skills development.

Cheers, Paul

Fluff isn't always a tiny piece

I hardly ever use something weighted in the field, seen enough broken rods without

Cheers
Lasse

I'm always slightly surprised at how much difference the terminal tackle I'm using here in the Bahamas makes to my cast, i.e. a substantial 'budgie' of a fly with 20 inches of thick wire (with split rings etc). Firstly, any attempt at a roll cast pick-up is doomed to a humiliating failure. As such, from the 'fly in hand' position I need a slightly ugly, but effective, swoop backwards (a bit like a Belgian cast). It also doesn't feel like fly casting until there is a certain length (weight) of line outside of the tip - I keep meaning to investigate the fly weight versus line weight ratio for me to fly cast properly and not just feel like I'm lobbing the weight of the fly etc. Another thing I'm finding is that sag is a big issue, especially if I'm wading up to my arse - any tick in the water absolutely kills things.

I did have a last second refusal from a 100lb plus lemon shark yesterday - I'm still wanting to get such a fish whilst wading. I had it nose on the fly for 5 or 6 strips before it spooked, I wish I had this on film because when it bolted it was like someone had dropped a bag of cement into the water from a great height.

I’ll remember to do this before next season. But for warming up to cast with multiple flies. When doing imaginary fishing for seatrout using two flies is a good idea. Being able to cast with a dropper in the wind is a helpful skill.