|
Hi Gordy,
Glad you got pictures from Bill. It is interesting to compare the still frames to the actual video footage.
My thought is that much more than slack removal is occurring, It is my belief that this prolonged drag is placing the rod and line under a good deal of tension while reserving casting arc to a critical moment.
Chuck
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Chuck,
Walter Simbirski and Bill Gammel both came up with it for us.
Placing the rod and line under tension with DRAG, even when the rod isn't bent (because it is horizontal) is what i think is happening, too. That is in line with what I said about DRAG acting against the inertia of the fly line.
Your point about reserving the casting arc to a critical moment also makes sense to me.
Gordy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] From Walter Simbirski,
Hi Gordy,
I know Bruce is more than capable of responding for himself but I'm sure some will comment on his statement that drag
is short and slow. When I look at Paul Arden casting the 170 style for example he begins his forward cast with his hand
as far back as it will go and the rod at horizontal (actually below horizontal in Paul's case). He then drags the rod from this
extreme rearward position to a point where the rod is about half of an arm's length in front of him before any rotation of the
rod occurs. At the same time he steps forward. Total amount of distance travelled by the rod in drag mode? About 8 or
9 feet. That doesn't sound short or slow BUT while the rod hand and butt moved 8 or 9 feet the rod tip also moved 8 or 9 feet
and I will guess that both ends of the rod were moving at around 2 - 3 yards or meters in a 1 - 1.5 second time frame.
Compare that to laying the rod out horizontally pointing backward and simply rotating the wrist 180 degrees. The hand moved
a few inches but the rod tip moved a total of 18 feet and it probably took less than a second.
So my guess is that when Bruce says "slow and short" he's talking about the movement of the rod tip, which is what
gets the line moving, and not the other end of the rod.
This is not a comment on various casting styles or their relative efficiency. My thoughts in that regard are that we
should ask Dick Fosbury his thoughts regarding conventional wisdom and applied physics when it comes to sports. :)
-25 here today. ugh!
Cheers!
Walter
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Walter,
Let's ask him. (Message string to follow in blue.)
My thought is that the average competent caster cannot move the hand (and therefore the rod) in translation anywhere near as fast as these expert competition distance casters.
Without the means to time it, I'm estimating that I wouldn't be able to move my hand and rod tip during drag any faster than about 2 m/sec. whereas the rod tip will move several times faster during the rotation of the casting arc. By comparison, I'd consider my drag move as slow.
Even these super-casters, then, will likely have drag speeds with rod tip velocities several orders of magnitude below their tip velocities during rotation. If so, then I'd look at their own "drag speeds" as relatively slow.
(I used the term "velocity" as a vector quantity assuming a straight rod tip path.)
Of course, body bend and body movement in the direction of the cast would also add to DRAG. The jump, is usually made during rotation.
I think Bruce has studied these moves to the point that he may be able to cite some figures.
Best,
Gordy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] From Bruce :
Hi Walter, nice to hear from you! As you note, even in a max distance cast and assuming all translation is included, the direct benefits of hand/butt translation are relatively small. And I still think that slack removal is a more significant contribution than direct velocity increase. As you note, the rotational part of a cast is far more important than the translational. But when hand/butt translation can make the rotational part more effective, it is important, of course. And I want to be on your "rotation only" casting team, it will be fun trouncing the "translation only" team...
Best,
Bruce
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Walter's answer:
Sorry Bruce - I didn't notice that Gordy had included you on this.
When I say translation in this case it is indeed all translation including a step of 3 or 4 feet added to hand translation
of 4 or 5 feet. I know most people don't cast this way and those that do only do it when going for maximum distance.
My point is that some people (not me in this case) will look at this aspect of the cast, i.e. hand motion, and these
particular examples of casting style when considering your previous statement and say, "How can Bruce call that
that slow and short?". If so they then they are missing the point. It's not the butt that casts the line - it's the tip
and I don't really care which movement causes the greatest and fastest butt movement. What we want to concentrate
on is what happens at the tip. Extreme efforts in translating the butt end of the rod can't compare to what a relatively
minor rotation effort does to the rod tip.
I'll gladly enter a distance casting competition with any caster in the world if they agree to restrict their movements
to translation only and l restrict my movement to rotation only.
Cheers!
Walter
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From Bruce :
Hi Walter, nice to hear from you! As you note, even in a max distance cast and assuming all translation is included, the direct benefits of hand/butt translation are relatively small. And I still think that slack removal is a more significant contribution than direct velocity increase. As you note, the rotational part of a cast is far more important than the translational. But when hand/butt translation can make the rotational part more effective, it is important, of course. And I want to be on your "rotation only" casting team, it will be fun trouncing the "translation only" team...
Best,
Bruce
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[GH] Walter replies :
Sorry Bruce - I didn't notice that Gordy had included you on this.
When I say translation in this case it is indeed all translation including a step of 3 or 4 feet added to hand translation
of 4 or 5 feet. I know most people don't cast this way and those that do only do it when going for maximum distance.
My point is that some people (not me in this case) will look at this aspect of the cast, i.e. hand motion, and these
particular examples of casting style when considering your previous statement and say, "How can Bruce call that
that slow and short?". If so they then they are missing the point. It's not the butt that casts the line - it's the tip
and I don't really care which movement causes the greatest and fastest butt movement. What we want to concentrate
on is what happens at the tip. Extreme efforts in translating the butt end of the rod can't compare to what a relatively
minor rotation effort does to the rod tip.
I'll gladly enter a distance casting competition with any caster in the world if they agree to restrict their movements
to translation only and l restrict my movement to rotation only.
Cheers!
Walter
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|