|
Walter & Group.....
[GH] Commentary following Summation :
[GH] From Walter Simbirski :
I think I would give both you and Ally passing marks here. :)
In all seriousness this is an excellent summation. Thanks!
Enjoy Thanksgiving.
Walter
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From Steve Smith :
I learn more from your summation than anything.Thanks again for all your great work,Gordie.Hope you all have a great Thanksgiving.
Steve
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] From Alan Kato:
Gordy,
Thanks for the help!
It is amazing how varied the group is. The common thread is the ability to cast a fly.
Whatever happens internally is a mystery.
Figuring it out completely and conversely not trying to figure it out takes much of the fun out of the endeavor.
Happy Thanksgiving to you!
Alan D. Kato AIA LEED AP
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] From Gary Davison :
Gordy,
Great Summary to the topic. Must say your overview was incredible to say the least.
Well done is an understatement!
Gary
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] From Dan Davala :
Gordy and Group,
This last thread has made me THINK indeed. It has made me THINK we are on a very dangerous path and has even made me question the overall purpose and definition of "Master Casting INSTRUCTOR". Rather than revealing any great casting truths, this thread instead has revealed once again a basic human issue and a bent toward complicating the simple and creating a perceived elite. Mac Brown even stated, "We commented not to a group of newbies but to an elite group of fly casters globally". On the other hand, while I once believed there were "no absolutes in fly casting", I did find one in this thread. It is ABSOLUTELY unnecessary to know, use, or understand words like "vector", "scalar", "azimuth", "coupled planed pendula", etc., or to write out complex math equations in order to cast a fly line with a fly rod or to teach another to do the same which is the overall point of us being here.
In my opinion, the move in recent years toward the use of complex terms and theories to describe and allegedly "understand" the cast are equivalent to the "Bug-Latin" days of years past, when if one didn't know the Latin name, the class, and sub-class of a particular insect, then one wasn't a "serious" fly fisher. This type of attitude helped earn fly fishers an elitist stereotype and a stigma that many of us have been trying to deconstruct ever since. While I cannot blame an enthusiast for wanting to make something more of their craft than it is, we here have chosen to be INSTRUCTORS, and as INSTRUCTORS we have a responsibility to our students (present and future) to keep our sport accessible, understandable, and FUN.
Another type of attitude that has me concerned is manifest in statements like the following:
"Imagine you had a CCI or MCI candidate testing and he went down that road of quoting the "line follows the rod tip" during an explanation. That would be a mighty tough hole to dig out of for a MCI in my opinion. Would you ignore the comment, challenge them to show you some examples, or sit back and let them dig in deep? I think I would let them dig in deep and hope they have a self discovery moment to question? If they did not see the light, maybe it will turn on for them at a later date...."
During a master level test, this should not be a "mighty tough hole to dig out of" at all, and should only require a clear, concise explanation and demonstration of how a candidate regularly uses this statement to teach students as well as some examples of how it applies to more skill levels than just beginners, such as when you are helping an experienced caster with a subtle tracking issue that is robbing them of efficiency. A tester with a preconceived mindset that words like "the line follows the rod tip" must be just another canned quote, and a hope that the candidate will dig a deep hole and find enlightenment at the bottom in the form of an opinion more like their own is not doing much for the consistency and objectivity of the program, nor for my confidence in either.
The bead chain examples, while interesting, lack a leader and fly and therefore most closely simulate the results one would see if they strung up their rod with a level line and no leader or fly. The line would certainly kick and behave in ways that again, while interesting, have little to do with the behaviour and layout of a balanced line, leader, and fly which is what we strive to teach our students with.
In my opinion, the key word in this whole thread is ALWAYS! Does the line ALWAYS follow the rod tip? Of course not! There are simply too many variables to ever quantify with physics, math, or opinion - popular or otherwise. To argue, however, that "the line follows the rod tip" is an antiquated belief and should not be stated is not only throwing out an effective and proven teaching tool that is easy to demonstrate, but a primary component of Bruce Richards' 6-step method of fault correction which is simple, effective, and proven. Observe the line, observe what the rod tip is doing to influence the line, observe what the caster is doing to influence the rod tip. Correct the caster, correct the rod tip, correct the resulting line layout.
In summary, I am of the opinion that what makes a "Master" instructor is one who can communicate the cast, which is clearly too complicated to easily explain from a physics perspective, in the clearest, simplest, most effective terms to the widest range of students regardless of their age or intellectual level. A fly rod and line is and always will be simply a stick and a string regardless of what anyone else wants to make it. While there is a time and a place to seek greater understanding of the why of things, our responsibility to our students is the how, and most of the time, simpler is better. Perhaps now is a good time for us all to review Mel Krieger's article on SIMPLICITY.
Not to dodge the questions, my short answers are as follows:
1. Does the line always follow the rod tip ? No, however it is ALWAYS influenced by it.
2. How can the same motion described above with the keystrokes yield 2 totally different line layouts with curves landing to the left or the right at will? By varying the power application. Under powered will result in a curve to the right, overpowered will result in a curve to the left.
3. When we make a snap cast, the line suddenly goes in the opposite direction to that of the last movement of the rod tip. How does that happen ? The line is first set in motion in one direction. Basic third grade physics keep it traveling in the direction it was set in motion. When the rod tip is snapped back in the opposite direction, a loop is formed and accelerated in the same way a bull whip is snapped. The line ends up in the direction the rod tip was first sped up and stopped, before it was snapped in the opposite direction. It seems Lefty was right, in this case anyway.
Happy Thanksgiving to all!
Dan Davala
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Dan,
Well stated.
We have gone way beyond what is required of a Master Instructor. Calls to question whether or not this was a good idea!
I'll post it as a "post-mortem" when I get back.
Have a great Thanksgiving !
Gordy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] From Paul Arden :
Hi Gordy,
A bit of a late reply to Guy! Yes we've been wrong about many things in the past and since we are continually learning it follows that we are probably wrong about many things in the present. That's the fun in learning, in finding out that you were wrong! It's discovering things that we didn't know that makes it interesting (for me).
Does it make us better fly casters or instructors? I think it probably does. One thing I do believe is that if we stop learning, or can't admit to being wrong which is what it amounts to, then how can we instill a desire to learn in our pupils?
The Internet has changed many things and continually challenges what we thought we knew. We now have more physicists and engineers dissecting casting, on a daily basis, with the advantage of high speed cameras and a lifetime of study. It follows that most of us who have virtually no background in the subject beyond high school are often wrong when it comes to our understanding.
It wasn't so very long ago that we believed that hauling works by deepening the load and that the rod was still bent at haul stop. A 15fps camera proved this to be false. Now many casters have 300fps cameras as toys. What a fantastic time to be an instructor!
Cheers, Paul
|