[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
  • Thread Index
  • Date Index
  • Subject Index
  • Gitzet fish Question (Tom White) / Casting efficiency



    Walter & Group.....

    Several of you have written to ask for more details on Tom White's "GITZET FISH".

    The whole idea is to explore the depth of a candidate's knowledge of fly casting tackle and the relationship of that factual knowledge to the real world of fly fishing.

    Tom would pick a particular fish.  It might be a real fish ( say a lake trout or a grayling ..... or even a tiger fish)   or it could have been one which Tom dreamed up ... a ficticious fish.   Rather than giving the candidate the real name (if there was one) he called it a GITZET FISH.

    Tom, then, played the part of the expert with respect to everything about that fish including its habitat, its feeding habits, its size, fighting ability, usual depth, even the usual weather in the areas where it was to be found.  All this information was withheld from the candidate until requested bit by bit by him/her.

    As the candidate asked questions about the fish, Tom would give the answers.  The candidate had to know what questions to ask of him in order to come up with a fly fishing outfit complete with fly and leader assembly needed to catch it.

    In choosing the rod and line, for example, the candidate had to ask Tom about the likely weather conditions including wind, the fishing conditions,  the depth at which the fish fed, the water conditions (lake, stream, river, bay, open sea ?????) He'd need to ask whether the fish was usually caught from the shore or a skiff and if the fish was spooky thus requiring long casts.

    To come up with a decision on the leader and fly needed, he'd have to ask what the fish customarily fed upon, whether the critter had sharp teeth or an abrasive mouth, and its size and fighting ability as well as whether or not it leaped, etc.

    To come up with the right reel, he needed to ask, not only about its size and fighting ability, but its usual way of fighting (dive deep and sulk, streak for cover,  "in-fighting" near the bank, make blistering fast long runs, etc., etc. )  The answers to these questions might be enough to make a decision about the type and amount of backing on the reel.

    Still having no idea as to the exact species, the successful candidate, at the end of the question period, would have given correct answers as to the rod, reel, fly line, backing, leader and approximate fly size and weight  (not the pattern).

    This line of questioning represents the kind of thinking required of a Master when one of his students looks to him as an expert on all things having to do with fly casting & fly fishing when that student turns to him to gain advice on tackle to be taken on a trip to fish for a species he's never seen.  The Master may also need to advise the student on other places to look for additional information on that particular fishery as well as advice on acquiring local knowledge when he gets there.

    Gordy

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

    From Gary Eaton :-

    Gordy & Chuck,
     
     I have benefited form Chuck's tutoring on this and many other drills (Thanks, Chuck!). I agree that it is a valid experience. I do allow myself some "slack" (pun intended) for  'fall back' from wind, tip recoil and similar vagaries, though. The crumpled finish is not tolerated and, I find, is mostly  an issue of greatly delayed rotation straightens the leader and early rotation brings the folds back into the actual fly line.
     
    Maybe Gordy could give us some sample calculations of the "index of inefficiency" to see if we 'get' it? I think Gordy is speaking of being "off the line" and Chuck is describing "collapsed layout". (Clarification requested) If you are folding things up, try to delay rotation and aim above the target. If you are to the side of the target look to align your back cast roll out more 'in-line' and watch for optimal SLP on the delivery stroke. .
     
    Respectfully,
     
     Gary Eaton

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Gary ....    Chuck and I are talking about the same thing.
     
    It's with a bit of humor that I came up with the, "index of efficiency".   All it is is the distance from where the fly actually landed to where it would have landed with an efficient cast and a perfectly straight line & leader layout.
     
    The greater that distance, the more, "crumple" and,"fall back" had occurred.
     
    Example  1.    My line is marked at 10' intervals from the leader connection to the backing connection. 
                           The leader measures 10'.
                           The target is 80' from the caster.
                           My fly is cast out to 70'   (10 feet short of the target)
                           The line in my line hand is at the 80' mark.
                           The layout is not straight.
                            If the layout had been perfectly straight, my fly would have landed at the 80' target (or close).
     
                            I have 10' of, "crumple" and/or, "fall back" which is a measure of my casting inefficiency.
     
     
    Example   2.    Same line markings and leader.
                            The leader measures 10'
                            The target is 80' from the caster.
                            My fly is cast out to 80'  (On or near the target).
                            The line in my hand is at the 80' mark.
                            The layout is perfectly straight including line and leader.
     
                             I have  0' of, "crumple" and/or, "fall back".  I have no casting inefficiency
                            
     
    Gordy
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~