Walter & Group.....
From Lou Bruno (My answers to his questions in his text in bold italics...... Gordy :-
Gordy,
If we drift during the back cast what effect would it have on our loop formation and does a linear move of our rod hand during drift have any effect of counter-flex?
Loop formation would not be changed by drift except to extend the time and distance of its travel.
I can blunt the effect of counterflex or diminish counterflex a little bit by the way I stop as well as with drift. One of Bruce Richards' statements a few days ago called attention to the effect of various stops on counterflex and loop formation.
What effect would result if we switched to a stiffer line (not heavier) on counter-flex?
When I use a stiffer line, as I do in the salt, with the same outfit and the same cast, I don't perceive any difference in counterflex. Perhaps high speed video would show a difference. We have not looked at that.
After looking at the graphs and pictures on loop formation is counter-flex more a byproduct of the rod and not the caster?
Counterflex is the product of both. Looks to me, though, as if it is mostly a product of the action (flexibility) of the fly rod. Al Crise was correct on that point.
Remember my comments about casting with a completely rigid broom-stick fly rod ?..... no counterflex at all no matter how I cast. If I try to minimize counterflex when casting with a really limber fly rod, I don't create much of an effect...... lots of counterflex anyway. Again, hi speed video might show some difference.
Loop shape is determined by the actual rotation of the rod tip provided the rod butt travels rotationally, not linear?
Linear movement of the rod tip is SLP (straight line path).
If we have an absolutely straight line linear path of the tip in all planes, then a collision will occur between the fly line and the rod tip.
In the real world of casting, that almost never happens ..... why ? Because even the most efficient casters have at least a little bit of convexity to the path of the rod tip.
The more convexity of the rod tip path, the larger the loop.
Most convexity is produced by rotation. (Theoretically, one could produce a convex rod tip path with linear motion (translation) alone if the rod were flexible and power application such that early acceleration of the stroke is followed by less acceleration and, then, by greater acceleration. ........ a bit of a stunt to make a point.)
I recognize three different applications of rotation made by increasing rod arc during the stroke:-
1.) Increased rotation all through the stroke forming a convex rod tip path throughout the stroke. This is what many beginning students do. It yields a large inefficient loop.
2.) Increased rotation early in the stroke. This gives us a convex rod tip path mainly in the beginning of the stroke. It can yield a wide loop such that the fly (upper) leg of the loop is way up high and the rod (lower) leg is fairly straight. This may purposely be done to help, "kite" a fly with a tailwind.
3.) Increased rotation at the end of the stroke just before the stop and RSP (which follows a fraction of a second later). It provides convexity of the rod tip path just before loop formation. This yields a wide loop which is well controlled .... as when casting a Clouser or a weighted nymph. The fly leg is fairly straight while the rod leg is lower. Downward motion (motion away from the oncoming line in other planes) of the rod tip ocurring as a result of both the caster's motion and counterflex AFTER RSP, affects the rod leg of the loop resulting in further widening of that loop.
Remember what Bruce has taught us ...... that what happens to the path of the rod tip prior to RSP largely determines the shape of the fly leg (upper leg) of the loop, whereas what happens to that path after RSP, largely determines the shape and demension of the rod leg (lower leg) of the loop.
Lou.... let me congratulate you for asking super good teaching questions !
Gordy
Lou