[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
  • Thread Index
  • Date Index
  • Subject Index
  • Comments on VARIABLES topic / Grant - history



    Walter & Group...

    I have had many comments on the topic, VARIABLES.  Far too many to share all of them.  I have picked out a few, however :

    From Peter Lami,

    Gordy:
    [GH]  Are they still "essentials" as we apply changes to them as variables?   [PL]  I agree with you Gordy, these are concepts that are open to debate and there is no canned answer that is right or wrong.

    [GH]  Is a straight line path of the rod tip an "essential" when making a controlled wide loop cast when casting a heavy weighted fly?  [PL]  Yes.  However, there are some important things to remember.  To avoid the heavily weighted fly from kicking over, or worse, the fly crashing into the fly rod, you need to slow down the tempo of your casting stroke and make a controlled wide loop by forcing the ending position of the rod well below RSP.  Alternatively, the caster might choose to deliberately break RULE #1 and make the cast just like a beginner and bend the wrist (a variable) too much to force the rod tip to follow a convex path and create a wide, open loop.  It's not a mistake if you do it on purpose.  In both methods, we are controlling the variables to solve the problem.

    [GH]  If you look back on the entries which followed our question, you will note that those whom you will recognize as Masters and well informed teachers gave logical answers though no two were the same.  
     
     [PL]  This is true and the reason why I feel this has been the most interesting topic so far this year!  Your Master Study Group hit a home run with this topic!!
    Peter
     
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     
    If praise is due, it goes to Carl Zarelli, not me.  He started the whole thing.      G.
     
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                                                                  COUNTERPOINT
     
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     
    From Jim Bass :
     
    Gordy, in reading some of these entries in your query re: variables, I am very quickly getting the impression that the CCI designation is perhaps paralell to a Bachelor's degree in flycasting instruction,  and that some of the responses to your query (like the one below from Peter Lami) is more along the lines of what I might consider within the realm of a Doctorate in Fly Casting Theory.
     
    So I am wondering what's expected of an MCI... because if what's expected is strongly along what I see as "the academic" like some of Peter's comments below, I might want to go no further in pursuing the MCI than I've gone (which isn't far I realize)- and instead stick with what's of practical value to a student in their quest to learn how to catch fish with a flyrod. Don't get me wrong here- I do not mean to discredit the academic as having little bearing on some level practical value, but if an oral exam to achieve the MCI designation involves re-examing Newton's and Einstein's theories... I might save myself some time here (tongue in cheek...kind of!)
     
    Anyway, I do enjoy the banter but I wonder if there should be a Doctorate in Fly Casting Theory that becomes the feeding lot for theorists, and that the Masters certification be tuned so that it plays more in the world of practicality that inures to the benefit of the teacher as respects his/her student ... but stops short of the threshold  to the esoteric.
     
    Jim
     
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     
    Jim...
     
     
    Our Study Group does both.  You have only recently joined so you have not seen the many very down to Earth entries which are aimed at the CCI who wished to become a Master.
     
    Even so, I see some value to the aspiring Master as he becomes exposed to some of the advanced thinking behind the scenes of abject practicality.  The CCI should be a good teacher of fly casting.  The Master must teach the CCI and be steward of the history, the detailed theory, and new developments behind modern methods of casting and teaching.  The Master must also recognize and assist the CCI who appears to be a good candidate for eventual Master Certification.  When testing you for CCI Cert. I recognized you as one such individual.
     
    There have been times when we discuss things with our engineers and physicists as well as our mathematicians..... these messages sometimes include calculus formulae and way-out concepts which are very detailed and far beyond the scope of Master study.  When that happens, I place those messages in attachments for those who wish to take it to extremes.
     
    Our latest theorist messages on variables straddles the fence.
     
    Let me add that the last thing I want our Group to do is to "spoon feed" packaged answers to questions likely to be asked on a Master's exam.  I'd much rather provide the concepts as tools for candidates to handle their teaching problems and to provide background sufficient for them to be able to handle any question examiners may pose.
     
    We, as examiners, might ask about "the essentials of fly casting".  If the candidate gives a well memorized list of them, they will serve as no more than the springboard for questions which test his ability to expand upon more detailed casting mechanics and theory behind them .... or even his/her reasons for challenging them.
     
    So often in past years (and sometimes of late) the Master candidate comes to the exam with woeful lack of understanding of the scope, depth and breadth of the knowledge required.  That yields an unhappy outcome.
     
    We're trying to change that.
     
    Gordy 
     
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     
    I understand Gordy, and after I sent my email I had second thoughts about my comments. Thanks for setting me straight and I look forward to being an active participant.
    My best,
    Jim
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     
    Jim.....   HEY ..... Point and Counterpoint puts the adrenaline in our veins and the fire in our bellies !!!!
     
    G.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    From Bob Hansell :
     
    Gordy,
     
    Thanks for venturing into the darker water of variables.
     
    The interesting thing here is everyone is focused on the variables of casting mechanics so far.  We have not discussed the variables in teaching/communication.  Seems to me (in my feeble mind), everything is a variable dependant on the current situation.  I believe most casts, if not all, are never exactly the same, students are not always either thinking (or doing ) the same thing even during one lesson, the wind, temperature, water, grass, casting objective, teaching objective and all, is always situation dependant.

    Therefore the descriptions we use to explain casting, casting mechanics, and such will always be situation dependant.  My doubt is that any great teacher would accept a standard vocabulary for all situations.  We all need to be flexible enough to understand our current situation, and the current situation of the person we are communicating with (student or certification tester) and choose words that convey our thinking as clearly as possible.
     
    I think that this is a wonderful opportunity!  Instead of getting mired into standardization we can discover more through exploring the variable nature of our sport and craft.  The really cool thing here is the possibilities are great.........
    Thanks,
    Bob
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     
    Bob...
     
    I agree !  Brings to mind a statement once made by Dennis Grant,  " IT DEPENDS !"
     
    Dennis might well have entitled his presentation on teaching at the Marlborough CE course as "variables in teaching " as he made us all think of ways to teach using the various means by which students learn.
     
    Gordy
     
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     
    David Lambert weighs in .....
     

    Gordy, here's my shorter, and longer answers -

    Re: variables and constants -

     

    Short answer: Every cast and virtually everything in a cast varies

    relative to the caster, the skill level, the equipment, the situation,

    the desired effect, and on and on.

    More? I can't think of a casting 'concrete' that does not at some level

    require a sidebar, an asterisk, an exception, or an explanation, which

    means they all vary and therefore are not constants.

     

    Long answer: I respectfully disagree with Peter Lami on his selection

    of variables. I believe this question addresses all forms of fly

    casting, not just straightline casting - that is, casts such as

    elliptical casts, rotary casts, circular casts, dynamic rolls and spey

    casts, and many other very usable, fishable casts, none of which employ

    the straight-line concept.

    And, can we claim as fact that the fly line always goes in the direction

    the tip was moving just before the stop? Casts like snap Ts and other

    fast reverse-direction casts might suggest otherwise.

    In each cast the situation varies; the physique, knowledge, and skills

    of the caster vary; the equipment varies, and it varies in relation to

    the caster and environment in which he is casting. Virtually everything

    about the cast is a variable, strictly speaking. That is a concept sure

    to rankle, especially some of the bullet listers, box thinkers and party

    liners.

    Maybe we should ask our physicists if there are constants in the cast.

    I've not seen a physics model that did not have at least a few asterisks

    attached to it. Which would make constants constant only if certain

    conditions are met -- only if the wind is right, only if you're making

    this type of cast, only if don't have a guide standing behind you, only

    if you have a specific type of line -- you get the idea. But then, that

    makes them variable. At least to my mind.

    Seems to me that in order to speak of constants, we have to adopt a

    vocabulary of generalities - or we have to truthfully throw in so many

    qualifiers and exceptions that the teaching becomes burdensome and

    ineffective.

    One guy's thoughts.

    David

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

    David

    Good thoughts to ponder.  Do consider Peter Lami's qualified answer, above.

    Also speaks to our concept of "essentials" as to whether they are scientific constants.  I think the latter carries a heavier burden.

     

    Aside -

    I just got my new copy of "BEYOND THE MOON" by James McCully.  I've studied Ocean tides for many years... but this is the most understandable writing on the subject I've ever seen.  You did a great job critiqueing it !  Couldn't find in at Amazon.com or Borders.   Barnes & Noble carries it.  A MUST for all salty anglers.

    G.

     
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     
                                                             ALEXANDER GRANT  -  more
     
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     

    Gordy,

    You wrote:

    "Some of you have written as to whether Grant could have competed with our advanced Two Handed Casters of today. One can only wonder what might have happened if he had been able to use present day equipement and had been schooled in modern casting methods."

     Grant set a record for double handed distance back in the 1880?s, I believe it was. It was a pickup single spey recast. From what I can gather it is what we today call a ?switch? cast. I believe the record was 65 yards, measured by judges. That record stood until 2005 when it was broken by Scott MacKenzie, another Scot, but one who was in his 20?s and had all the best the world could offer in equipment and lines. Grants record stood for 110 years, so yes, I am sure he could hold his own into days world. And he may have still been casting greenheart as he did it.

     Guy Manning

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