RE: Translational movement vs. Rotation

Jerry....

Sounds as though you are doing things efficiently.

As you have followed the e-banter on whether or not there is a true, "stop" of the hand, you see there are differences of opinion.

My own observation is that in teaching the concept of, "stop" to students that we get rapid deceleration which is what we're really looking for.

I don't feel that any true, "brick wall stop" is ever actually achieved by a caster prior to RSP where the loop begins to form.....rather a very rapid deceleration of hand motion. Of course, there can be a true stop in the sense of complete lack of forward motion of the hand after loop formation, which is what can happen as you thrust forward at the end of your stroke. For most casts, the rapid deceleration has already occurred.

Remember......loop formation starts as soon as the movement of the rod tip has less velocity than that of the line behind it. It does so as the line overtakes that rod tip......at RSP.

Gordy

From: jerry puckett <jerry_puckett2001@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Gordon Hill <hillshead@xxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Translational movement vs. Rotation
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 08:22:37 -0700 (PDT)

Gordy, I studied my cast while practicing yesterday, particularly the distance cast, and tried to understand arm movements. The stop I have is after I have reached my maximum stroke length and it is more of a stop of the entire body and casting arm because I have reached full forward extension for my body type.

During the last part of the forward cast my wrist is rotating to target angle as my arm moves forward and up, all one continuous motion. The two words you use are helpful as I try to understand my cast: there is rotational motion of the hand (rod arc) to target angle as I continue forward with an out and up translational motion to a fully out stretched arm. I am aware of the potential danger of elbow injury so am trying to back off a little on complete arm extension as I cease all forward movement. (Stop?) So is this a true stop or not, as I use on shorter casts?

For now, as I try to conceptualize my cast, I see all of these movements (rotational and transitional) as one continuous movement with only a true stop coming with full or almost full forward extension of the casting stroke. This has come about as I have heeded Bruce Richards advise on try to find ways to increase stroke length. While I have still to become an really accomplished caster this is giving me some 100 foot plus cast with a seven weight. This is only offered because I hope is it a sign of some progress and doing something right.

I am working on tighter loops and timing at the same time time. Just trying to put it all together and not sure this makes sense but it is my inital attempt to do so. Thanks for your and every ones help and input. Jerry

Gordon Hill <hillshead@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Troy....

Re your second paragraph:

Both the translational motion of the casting hand and its rotational motion which yields the casting angle (or, "rod arc) are useful for almost all casts.

Tim Rajeff brought up a good point, recently, in our discussions when he asked these 2 questions:

1.) How far can you cast with ONLY translational movement of the casting hand ?

2.) Even though not pretty, how far can you cast with ONLY rotational movement of the hand ?

The obvious answer is that you can't cast very far in case, 1.).....while you can cast much farther in case, 2.). To that I'll add that neither without the other yields a truly efficient cast.

Gordy

From: "Miller, Troy" <Troy.Miller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Allen Crise" <flysoup@xxxxxxxxxx>
CC: "Gordon Hill" <hillshead@xxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: What do you feel or sense at the end of the casting stroke?
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2006 14:51:09 -0500

The cast that Server is saying should be in the Masters test would be a kayakers cast. You MUST ?center? your cast on a yak, or?. Kersplash! Sputter sputter? Anyone who fishes from a sitting position is already an efficient caster if he/she casts more than 50 feet routinely. But as you know, Allen, fishing from a sitting position in a yak and on the cushy front seat of a bass boat are two very different things. You can get away with moving your center of gravity when you?re on a relatively large and stable craft, but when you?re top-heavy on a bobbing cork, it?s really easy to tip it over if you don?t maintain controlled balance.

And, I agree 100% with Gordy when he says that he thinks that we can?t ignore the translational movement in a casting stroke. I talked about this at your workshop, not sure if you were there when we first reviewed the Analyzer outputs. Bruce strongly defends the position that he and Noel have held from the start ? that linear motions are more ?stylistic? and rotational movements are where the ?substance? is. The jury living in my simple mind has not returned with a verdict on that one yet?

Regards -- TAM

-----Original Message-----
From: Allen Crise [mailto:flysoup@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 2:35 PM
To: Miller, Troy
Subject: FW: What do you feel or sense at the end of the casting stroke?

catch up E mail

Allen Crise FFF Master Casting Instructor

SOC VP of Education

Hawk Ridge Flycasting School

2508 A County Road 1011

Glen Rose, TX 76043

254-897-2045

geocities.com/rrdoctor

flysoup@xxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----
From: Ssadik1@xxxxxxx [mailto:Ssadik1@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 8:40 PM
To: hillshead@xxxxxxx; plami@xxxxxxxxxxx; flysoup@xxxxxxxxxx; Sobbobfish@xxxxxxx; rtab@xxxxxxx; CAPTPERMIT@xxxxxxx; creangler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; daver@xxxxxxxxxx; dennisg@xxxxxxxxxxxx; dsprague01@xxxxxxxxxxx; ephemera@xxxxxxx; brushycreekfc@xxxxxxxxx; barefootj@xxxxxxx; bradyir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; flyfishar@xxxxxxxxxxx; ken.cole@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; captkirk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; glbaggett@xxxxxxxxx; Mkreider1@xxxxxxx; martyt@xxxxxxxxxx; niallogan@xxxxxxxxxx; pminnick@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; bigfly@xxxxxxxxx; whorwood@xxxxxxxxx; flycasts@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; sheila@xxxxxxxxxx; scjacobs@xxxxxxxxxxxx; cooper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; tharper@xxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: sportfisher@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; mildbill@xxxxxxxxxxxx; caddis@xxxxxxx; Brydnlnims@xxxxxxxxxxx; cezannealexander@xxxxxxxxxxx; crazycharlie@xxxxxxx; croberts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; blacksalmon@xxxxxxxxxxx; DermSox@xxxxxxx; gladesflybum@xxxxxxxxx; gavin@xxxxxxxxxxx; iverson@xxxxxxxxx; jfs523@xxxxxxxxxxx; jerry_puckett2001@xxxxxxxxx; Captsilverking@xxxxxxx; till@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; kathleen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; thedamselfly@xxxxxxxxxxx; kerrrc@xxxxxxxxx; simbirsw@xxxxxxx; bobbeanblossomFFF@xxxxxxxxxxx; Hillcathy@xxxxxxx; dnewpher@xxxxxxxxxxxx; donjack@xxxxxxxxxxx; douglas.swift@xxxxxxxxxxxx; erniemaynard@xxxxxxxxxxx; FlyfsFrank@xxxxxxx; gregrahe@xxxxxxxxxxx; Hlhpc@xxxxxxx; jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; jhara.carter@xxxxxxxxxxx; harveyjl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; t.maltese@xxxxxxxxx; skifishvail@xxxxxxxx; jfv@xxxxxxxxxxxx; trallag@xxxxxxx; Captflyrod@xxxxxxx; mollysemenik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; randshesse@xxxxxxxxxxx; fraudflies@xxxxxxx; shane@xxxxxxxxx; snowmonkey29@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: What do you feel or sense at the end of the casting stroke?

A note from Gordy

~~~~~

Server....

Please forward this to the Group for me........

Your discussion of what we might call, "the snap-t-effect" is, I feel, valid. That ceiling trick demo's it nicely.

Your description of a, "baseline cast" almost doesn't exist in the real world of casting. If it did, we'd have convex pathways of the rod tip in each instance where the rod load was insufficient to produce enough bend in the rod....which would be for all but very few casts.

This leads to one of the theoretical problems with analyzing casts from computer readouts generated by the use of the Casting Analyzer which measures only one thing.....angular change of position of the rod butt. Period. This ignores translation movement of the casting hand (and the cork grip). A new generation of analyzer might well incorporate both.

In real world distance casting, we have many things going on in additional to the angular movement of the rod in response to torsional forces....and most of these are partly if not fully translational . They include: 1. Translational movement of the hand, 2. Movement of the upper body in the direction of the target, 3. (Often) a step forward and, 4. (Occasionally) a jump forward by the caster.

Some day, we may even have a casting robot such as the, "Iron Byron" used to reproduce and analyze golf swings as well as computerized devices well advanced compared to what we have now.

Will all this help us catch more fish ????? Probably not. Will it help us cast better ? I think so.

Gordy

Now my remarks to Gordy's remarks. The "baseline" cast is both a useful cast and a useful theoretical paradigm. In moving water trout fishing I use it most of the time anyway. For fishing off the deck of a boat one has more flexible conditions and can implement the more exaggerated motions but in many other fishing situations they are less feasible and less necessary. In my very, very limited experience in sight type fishing in shallow water I don't thing the guide could pick out what was happening at more than fifty feet anyway. In demonstrating to audiences my standad cast is 40-60 ft with no haul and no hand translation except to get the rod to the casting position. In fact if you are wading and fishing it is a very normal cast and the routines one goes through for distance aren't that important. But more important it is an excellent platform from which to examine casting physics and mechanics. At some time in the future I'll describe the physics of what I've been describing as base motion effects. The items you mentioned fall largely fall into that category or into area that I call angle effects. By the way a good test, say for the master's performance exam, would be to demonstrate 60 ft with loop integrity with the line trapped under a finger and chest translation of no more than several inches.

Server