Walter & Group...
After I'd sent the message a few days ago on whether or not DRAG and CREEP were to be considered outside the casting stroke or within it, I got answers which were all over the place.... some didn't make sense to me...
UNTIL
I began to see the reason for this. It simply was not a fair question due to the fact that I had not provided a basic definition or description for either of these terms. More importantly, I had not provided one for CASTING STROKE.
We on the FFF Glossary Committee have not finalized our definitions by having them ratified by the CBOG. That being the case, we've agreed not to publish them until this is done.
I'll give you one example of how convoluted glossary discussions can get as we consider the "definition" or even the use of one word:
DRAG
Webster's Unabridged Dictionary lists 38 definitions or uses for the word.
A simplified scientific definition wasn't included : DRAG: Resistance of a body being moved through a medium.
The only definition having to do with fishing was that of the "drag" of a reel.
I purposely took one brief paragraph from a message by Bill Hoot who was thinking of the physics involved :-
"Drag is not part of the casting stroke. It is not something the
caster actively does. Drag is passive, due to physics of the air
resistance on the skin of the fly line of the un-rolling fly loop.
It does provide loft or "lift" keeping the loop up longer before
gravity brings it down.
I am very much looking forward to your courses at the FFF Nat.
Conclave in Loveland.
Bill Hoot ["Grey-owl"]"
Now Bill is NOT wrong in his way of looking at "drag". He is using the physics description of the word as he considers what we've recently discussed as "skin drag" and "form drag".
Most others took the word to mean translational movement of the fly rod during the fly cast, either within or without the casting stroke depending upon how they chose to define casting stroke.
Used this way, "DRAG" can also be called "SLIDE" or "TRANSLATION".
As I'm sure you know, some champion distance competition casters (Rick Hartman being a prime example) use what many call DRAG to advantage. They start their cast with the rod tip way back, the rod parallel (or within a few degrees of being parallel in either direction) with the ground. The rod is moved forward in the direction of the cast without much (or sometimes any at all) rotation. This is essentially linear translation of the fly rod. These casters don't begin their rod arc (rotation) until they have "dragged" as far as they can. Then they rotate the rod and complete the cast.
Some other champion distance casters (Steve Rajeff, for example) use no translation ("drag") at all and yet achieve equal or better distances.
"Drag", then, may well be considered a manifestation of style .... not substance.
Why do some distance casters find that it helps them so much ?
1.) "Drag" gets the line moving; thus overcoming inertia of the fly line at the start of the fly cast.
2.) It can aid in taking up any unwanted slack.
3.) For some casters it helps reposition the hand and arm for efficient rotation.
4.) It can keep the line moving while delaying rotation. (Delay of rotation has been shown by Bruce Richards to help casters achieve tighter loops.)
5.) For most casters, it doesn't yield much acceleration. While I don't think it has been actually measured, I suspect that elite distance casters who use it will be found to have greater acceleration with this move than most casters can achieve. (Problem is that with pure translation, one cannot accelerate the rod tip any more than acceleration of the hand alone in contrast to hand angular acceleration being greatly magnified by the rod as a long lever arm during rotation. As the rod bends in proportion to the energy applied, this translates to linear acceleration of the rod tip.)
6.) Some casters who use it claim that they feel it helps smooth their casts and minimize improper application of power. Whether this is true or simply a caster's impression or "feeling", I don't know.
7.) A very limited amount of rod load as demonstrated by rod bend can occur if "drag" is performed with the rod at an angle of more than 180 degrees with respect to to the ground. This is necessarily proportional to the amount of acceleration which the caster can achieve while making this translational movement. Except in rare instances, I doubt that as a stand-alone move, it would be enough to achieve loop formation, though when added to acceleration produced later in the cast with rotation it can be assistive.
If "drag" is considered outside the casting stroke, it can decrease stroke length; if inside the stroke, it can decrease it.
Not considered "drag" by many, is the translation of the fly rod which accompanies rotation as a mixed movement used by most casters. For many good casters, this translation gives way to ever greater rotation as the cast progresses.
Depending, then, upon the definition of CASTING STROKE, drag may be translational movement of the fly rod prior to the stroke or pure translational movement within the stroke.
I am not an elite champion distance caster and never will be. As I studied this move, however, and added it to my distance cast, I did find that I could achieve very slightly greater average distance. Did I find it of value when fishing ? Rarely.
One way or the other, I see it as an elective part of the FLY CAST.
Gordy