"Line plane"- Other terms / Hearing vs. Understanding

Let's have some more answers to my request for advice on roll cast practice. G.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

Food for thought on "LINE PLANE" and casting terminology in general from Ally Gowans. My comments in his text in bold blue italics :

Here is another challenge, what is line plane? What line plane is; is far from plain! How do you describe/measure line plane? Is it measured in degrees form horizontal, vertical, rod axis or what? A line can and usually does travel in more than one plane so which is used to describe the cast. The rod and line can travel in different planes, quite deliberately during casting so the rod plane and line plane need not be the same.

In the fly casting literature and with in the field teaching, the use of various "planes" has cause much confusion during the past few years. This is why I brought up this subject . In my humble opinion, I must agree with you completely that there really is no such thing ... and that it cannot be measured as a geometric plane at all. Your right.... PLANE ISN'T PLAIN !

Even with your preceeding paragraph, you use the term "rod plane" after both of us had agreed not so long ago, that my use of that term was not as accurate as the term "casting plane" which you preferred. I also agree that the "rod plane" ("casting plane") would not be the same as the "line plane" ! I think a better term for "rod plane" might well be "rod orientation".... in fact when I taught "rod plane", I defined it as the ORIENTATION of the rod from vertical to horizontal on either side of the caster ..... thus relating to the ground. G.

All the terms you list below I will have used during teaching. My normal approach with beginners is to have them understand that the same casting technique may be used whilst altering rod planes in any number of steps from horizontal right to horizontal left. The ups and downs between back and front, the 180deg principle I refer to as tilt eg. Tilt into the wind – one rule that covers any wind component along the casting direction (the other wind rule is “cast on the downwind side” for across body wind components). Taking these together they quickly learn how to adjust for any conditions.

Good way to put it ! ( I do like that word, TILT.) When related to the ground or water surface, one can easily measure the "tilt", "trajectory", or "launch angle" as a simple angle ..... NOT a plane. G.

Let's start with the words to describe "LINE PLANE" and see what word or word combo. might be best when teaching fly casting to non scientific students. I'll start with a couple of suggestions:

There is another quandary that comes to mind. What is an overhead cast? Would Lefty’s favoured style be called an overhead cast? If not what name do we give to a back and forth (two cast) casting technique? There may answers in history!

Ally.... this is another term easily challenged. Historically, I think this term may have been used to differentiate between horizontal casting with the rod parallel to the ground. Other terms crept in perforce, since not all casts were made with the rod vertical or horizontal ..... in fact almost all casts are made with the rod oriented somewhere inbetween ..... so we got terms like "off vertical" and "off horizontal". This gets even more problematical as we view casts critically and note that when fishing, most casts are made with the fly rod oriented a bit differently between the back cast and the forward cast. This is best seen when standing behind the caster.

The term "overhead casting" has also been used to differentiate the two cast (back cast- forward cast) technique from the family of eliptical casts. Same witht he term, "straight line casting"

In short, I think the term "overhead cast" might well be scrapped despite that it has rolled off the tongues of casting instructors and authors for years. "Straight line casting" may be a bit more accurate, but only in lieu of a better term. Unfortunately, scrapping a well entrenched term would not be easy. Going with a well informed interpretation of it may be the way to go. G.

Ally Gowans

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Hearing vs. Understanding as we Teach

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Jim Valle sent us this message from Kirk Eberhard's Spey Study Group :-

Gordy and Group,

As you know I have joined a spey study group as I work on my THCI (Kirk Eberhard) , interesting to see how much of your study group ends up over there so here are a couple interesting and important points re communication and learning from that group that I thought would be appreciated by the Masters Study Group. Especially Chuck Easterling’s observations….

Hope this helps,

Jim V

Group,

Good words from Chuck, my thoughts in red.

Kirk

-------Original Message-------

From: charles easterling

Date: 3/5/2009 9:46:58 AM

To: kirk eberhard

Subject: Re: Instantly Forgotten/Rarely Understood

Hi Kirk,

This is an interesting question. My suspicion is that the written and spoken word often are not very good tools for communicating what the instructor is trying to convey. Agree

I would suggest that frequently we think our "words" are conveying our thoughts and we "think" the person to whom we are speaking is understanding what we are saying but often that is not the case. True words! In order to avoid embarassment students/others often respond with an afirmitive nod even if they don't understand/don't have a clue.

A good idea to "test", have students/others reiterate/repeat your instructions. Veteran instructor Ron Lauzon asks students "what did I just say", in a nice way of course.Ron points out that students/ people hear/digest/perceive identical instructions in amazingly different ways! "What did I just say?"

A few years ago I had an opportunity to spend some time with Al Kyte and we went out to a ballfield and videoed my casting. At the ballfield Al made some observations about my mechanics and I thought I understood what Al was saying. When we got back to my house, Al and I sat down and looked at the video with Al again going over what he said at the ballfield. Wow! It was an eye opener being able to hear Al's comments while seeing the video gave me a much better understanding of what he was saying. That has stayed with me and now whenever I give a lesson I try and take a video camera along to help insure the student understands what I am saying.

Along these same lines, several years ago Bruce Richards and I were out casting and Bruce was explaining something to me which I thought I grasped. Bruce then said something along the lines of, "Here, put your hand on top of mine and feel what I am doing." Again, what he was saying became much clearer. I think these two examples gave me a much better idea about how I learn and they have certainly influeneced how I teach. Excellent points, thanks for sharing.

Kirk

Chuck