|
Walter & Group...
[GH] From Gary Davison :
[GH] Gary,
Just my way of looking at it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] From Gary Eaton :
Gordy,
Appreciating your analysis of the LOOP article by Lee, it is different enough to be difficult for those who resolved previous terms to grasp. It also shares the weakness of previous, and our own, analyses in assuming most casters will exhibit similar compilations of these movements. Like Al Kyte's, "elbow styles" writing, such simplifications fail to encompass the complexities of all in-line casters.
When pursuing my best loops, I seek extremely delayed rotation. In this pursuit, my translation and rotation become more separate and experience a much shorter transitional period of coinciding (combining) of the two movements. I observed similar aspects of the Hartman-Arden "step-through" to lengthen the translational component for distance.
My casting movement works for me and might befuddle Doug Swisher, based upon my observation of his 3M videos on casting. Likewise, no winning tournament caster should change too many things at once and mess with their success. More importantly, we all change our mechanics and motions for widely variable casting tasks.
The rote application of "style" assigned to various casters evaluated in the Kyte-Moran surveys, simply fails to cross-over to the broader range of casting intentions. Joan Wulff certainly does not hang her elbow in front for distance casts, nor does Lefty Kreh cast pure side arm for close-in accuracy. Similar realities defy the labeling with respect to elbow position defining style. Even if we apply the term "default", this also creates a "default" casting distance and purpose, thereby undermining applicability across the range of casting demands.
Similarly, focusing on the hand movement with relative disregard for tip movement will fail to "work". Fundamentally, rod-tip movement dictates casting mechanics and fits best into casting universality and instructors' focal-point for analyses. All of these concepts tie into the Gammels' "Essentials".
Keeping it simple, makes it accessible. Being thorough clarifies intent.
Gary Eaton, MCI
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Gary,
Of course, we all change the basic mechanics of the fly cast to suit our objectives. We choose to cast with different styles and modifications of touted "styles" to meet the demands of different casting and fishing circumstances as well.
If we add to this the never ending list of variables, we end up with a description of fly casting whjich is almost infinite in scope.
Because of that, we tend to break these things down into simpler segments as we teach. That is what Al Kyte did as he wrote about "elbow styles". He made a complex issue digestible.
You call attention to your use of delayed rotation. Different casters use varying amounts of delay. I'll vary a great deal with my blend of translation and rotation depending upon the distance and other objectives of the cast and the casting challenges. When I tried my very best to use pure translation at the start of my cast, a trained observer standing at my side noted that there was no way I could avoid some degree of admixed rotation. I've since observed no casters who could go very far with pure translational rod motion even when they thought they had done so.
This is what I meant by my comment, "I see an almost telescopic relationship between the two as most casts start with largely translational movement which, as the cast progresses, blends with progressive rotation. That blend is a changing relationship as the cast progresses to the stop sequence and launch."
Gordy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] From John Field :
Hi Gordy,
I see casting stroke length as the sum of the distance the hand is moved from the beginning of rod loading, until the stop (or RSP), plus the distance the caster’s cervical spine moves in the same direction. Let’s take two examples.
A caster attempts a long cast without moving his/her body and the stroke length is measured. Next, the same stroke is made, except the caster bends backward at the waist, rotates the hips and shifts body weight rearward on the backcast, then rapidly reverses these motions forward for a long delivery cast. During the second cast, the rod hand has moved over a greater distance than in the first. This additional translation was contributed by the body, not the arm.
Body movement, especially torso bending, contributes to the rod arc as well and I believe it should be recognized.
Happy angling,
John
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] John,
Joan Wulff has discussed body motion and "body blocks". Lefty Kreh has called attention to the value of body motion... particularly valuable as we get older.
It is "in the manual" of champion distance casters.
Body translation (such as a forward lurch, or a hop or jump in the direction of the cast when distance casting) is used by many distance casters as an additive feature.
Should we embrace the dimensions of body translation in the direction of the cast in a definition of casting stroke length ? .... especially as we consider that the casting hand does travel farther with body movement than it would without it ?
Perhaps.
Nice call ! ..... something I hadn't thought of.
Granted, the casting arc can be increased by body bend.... however, what fly casters call an "arc" is really an angle. A simple geometric entity no matter how achieved, as I see it.
Gordy
|