|
Walter & Group...
[GH] This string of messages contains some answers I've given which may not reflect the opinion of other examiners. They speak to the uncertainties which remain at present as examiners and candidates try to interpret the intent of the task descriptions.
Any time a candidate feels that the task description isn't perfectly clear, he/she should ask the examiners to make clear their interpretations.
I welcome any helpful input from members of the MCI Testing Committee.
Gordy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Ralph is one of 17 who asked this question ! :
Hi Gordy,
First question that comes to mind for task two when it’s said “Repeat on the opposite side of the body. “ is:
Is this to be done with the primary or opposing casting arm? It can be interpreted either way, especially now that the ability to cast with the opposing arm is getting more emphasis in the MCI test.
Regards,
Ralph Tomaccio
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Question from Rich Knoles :
Hi Gordy, What is the aiming element of this task? Does performing this task on the opposite side of the body mean reaching across or with the opposite hand? Thanks, Rich Knoles
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Ralph, Rich and others who asked this question in different ways,
This is to be performed with the primary casting arm .... No switching hands (As I have been interpreting it.)
The task description says, "Repeat on the opposite side of the body". I see this to mean that the casts are to be made with the rod tip over the opposite side of the caster.
Rich, I'm not sure just what you mean by the "aiming element". Of course, this is not one of the accuracy tasks.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Two questions from Jim Bass :
Gordy
1. May the candidate use his non - dominate hand to cast on the opposite side of his body?
2. May you change your stance enough to have your body not restrict your back cast, on the cast to your opposite side?
On your comment about No hauling I put my line hand in my pocket.
Best Regards Jim
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Jim,
1. I think not.
2. I see stance as a matter of style with any of the tasks. As Dusty Sprague has pointed out, carrying styles to extremes as with a stance which makes the candidate appear awkward or ill at ease would not be a good idea from a teaching point of view.
3. Hand in pocket to avoid the temptation of hauling is OK.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] From Ally Gowans :
Hi Gordy,
Another point re this test is that when I did it I would have liked to change hands to conform to “Repeat on the opposite side of the body.”
I was told that I had to use the same hand on both sides which is not “Repeat on the opposite side of the body” because one side is “off shoulder”. This didn’t bother me I just asked which hand they wanted me to use however it should be clearly stated “Using the same hand etc . . . “.
Best wishes,
Ally Gowans
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Ally,
As with many of these things, the more clearly the exam is written, the better.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Advice from Gary Eaton :
Gordy,
The indispensable orientation that helped me "get" this task came from Tony & Marilyn Vitale when I took some MCI coaching from them. Aim the loops, both front and back, as though the angler were casting within a tunnel and the top legs of the loops need to scrape the inverted "U"-shape of the tunnel ceiling and walls.
I expanded this, with the input of an MCI prep day from Jason Borger, to include a giant cone where the rear "tunnel" opening is a much, much larger horseshoe (over 25-feet tall) and the front opening less than half of that. This cone concept helped me improve both the size and orientation of my back casts as I tried to "aim" them upward. The inherent back-cast stop becomes both more abrupt and earlier than if not attending to the upward trajectory intention.
As I reviewed my self-video of this task from front and side, the actual trajectory really is not very severely downward in the front. This goes back to a previous post (years ago) I submitted here about the estimation of the angle of the back cast seeming more vertical from the casting position than from the a side view forty-feet away. In classes my clients over-estimate the verticality of a back cast loop by at least fifty percent viewed from the rod butt vs from the side. It is a real eye-opener for them and they begin to value aiming back cast loops to improve forward casts. I have to include some tricks to convince some that the loops are truly identically oriented.
Practically speaking , if the back cast motion begins from in front of the caster, especially initial back casts from the surface, and arc to STOP at least 90-degrees from origination angle, there is no possibility of throwing the back cast too vertically. Part of this includes an abrupt back cast stop to form a properly narrow loop width and partly from the counter-flex of the adequately loaded rod.
I would not have realized the severe under-estimation of the verticality of back-casts without the extremely time-consuming process of detailed analyzing of video from 90-degree angles of the same casts. My ancient Sony VHS camera also has a "Sports Mode" that generates a nice slow-down effect that helps in providing the right speed for analysis.
My hint on this MCI task - cast in a tunnel or a giant cone with very straight fly leg of your loops..
Gary Eaton
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Another message from Gary Eaton :
Gordy,
I advocate raising the elbow to near shoulder height to perform all opposite-side casts. The main intent being to allow the rod to clear the top of the head for drifting into the back cast along the loop trajectory and to avoid body-part interference with stroke length. Obviously, as distances increase, this becomes more important. It seems critical for the near-horizontal loops on the line side of the body. The rod side horizontal loops may be closer to the surface than the off-hand, but the task doe snot determine loop origination height, only angular orientation to the surface.
Gary Eaton
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Gary,
A good way to do it as a teaching demonstration.
As an examiner, I'm impressed with the candidate who can also bring the horizontal (parallel with the ground) casts very low so as almost to "clip the tips of the grass" without actually ticking.
With a candidate who is doing very well, I sometimes ask for that to be done. (I won't flunk on this addition, however, because I think it goes beyond the expectations.)
Tom White, when teaching this task as he coached MCI candidates would have them do this. Then he'd stop and ask: "What is the most important thing you had to do as you went lower and lower to avoid hitting the ground ?"
The answer he was looking for : "I had to progressively increase my loop and line speed".
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] From Mark Milkovitch :
Gordy,
I have three questions on Task #2:
1. I have seen this task performed two ways: right handed caster casting off shoulder and right handed caster simply leaning over to the left and casting on shoulder. Are both acceptable?
2. At the horizontal is there an expected line height somewhere around waist level?
3. To fight the effects of gravity an ever so slight climbing cast, forward and back, helps on the horizontal. Is that allowed?
Thank you,
Mark Milkovich
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Mark,
1. I'd accept each method. I'm not certain all examiners would do so.
2. Not specified. As I stated, above, I have my candidates get that horizontal cast as far down as possible. I do know that many examiners accept casts at waist level. For the sake of consistency in testing, this may be addressed along with other ambiguities when the revised MCI exam comes out.
3. I would accept that if not extreme. As with 1. and 2. I'm not certain other examiners would.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|