News:

The Best Fishing Forum In The UK.
Do You Have What It Takes To Be A Member?

Main Menu
Please consider a donation to help with the running costs of this forum.

Casting Day 27-10-07 Analyser Results

Started by Wildfisher, October 30, 2007, 09:08:47 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

rabbitangler


Dougie Smith

I'm happy to have mine put on the forum. I'm looking forward to seeing them all.

sandyborthwick

Unfortunately didn't get there but this machine sounds most interesting - might have known certain characters style was unmonitorable!!!!!. I'm surprised they didnae brake the machine!!!! LOL.

Sandy B.O.

Wildfisher

As requested.

Click on the link to view rather than download and save you have to have the Acrobat plug-in installed - most browsers do

[attachimg=1]
[attachimg=2]
[attachimg=3]
[attachimg=4]
[attachimg=5]
[attachimg=6]
[attachimg=7]
[attachimg=8]
[attachimg=9]
[attachimg=10]
[attachimg=11]


Wildfisher


rabbitangler

I think I should be the one who needed instruction! I'm blaming the bad leg for the results

Magnus

Hi Paul

Compare Paul 1 and 2 and you can see what the gadget made of that.

Guys

Thing about this is most of us are casting unnaturally the first time we use the Casting Analyzer - until I got this thing I very rarely cast without hauling - now I practice it. To get a more accurate comparison means having the same rod and casting the same length of line used by the sampled experts - and they (actually more he) was casting not fishing.

Do that test on your own time and test again and again - and the benefits become clear. Smoother acceleration, neater more controlled backcast and slower tighter effortless forward cast. Then introduce hauling and you'll see what that does - for sure it adds linespeed and all that good stuff but it also masks niggling little issues.

If you want to see some really weird results I have those too - Fred obviously :P - but I've plenty where I use a more aggressive style used in distance casting - I showed some of you a bit of it on the day. The CA thinks it sucks - hmmm - well thats the style of backcast Paul Arden's using to hit 130ft with a #5 line. Have a look at the BFCC results http://uksf.sea-angler.org/bfcc/bfccresults.html - incidentally that gives you some idea of what can be done. Paul is one of the best distance casters in the world with a #5 line - he's fairly good casting short too!

If you'd like to see his style - http://www.sexyloops.com/movies/paulcast_oct07.mov - I suggest downloading - its a big clip.

Magnus

Very acute question Mike. Simple answer - I don't know.

The CA was designed as a collaboration between a Prof. of Mechanical Engineering (Noel Perkins) and a leading FFF instructor (Bruce Richards.) The idea was to offer a diagnostic tool built on basic physics of casting - which sounds grand and not a little scary. As far as I can see it takes some knowledge of and interest in casting mechanics to explain what the reports mean - but it certainly doesn't need an expert to use it - just some practice - I'm working on that.

To my mind it may cause people to get interested in their casting and trying to improve. BUT it can't teach, demonstrate, explain or encourage. So I'd have to say instruction is still essential and a good instructor will find a CA helpful. It should mean that some of the really naff advice dished out as casting help is exposed as naff  :D

Oh and it's a great leveler - the first time I tried it was with one of the most highly qualified UK instructors and an ex tournament champion - they both failed to record a backcast - so Fred's in good company  :P






haresear

I wish I had had stopped playing with toys long enough to be analysed now. :

Quoteuntil I got this thing I very rarely cast without hauling - now I practice it. To get a more accurate comparison means having the same rod and casting the same length of line used by the sampled experts - and they (actually more he) was casting not fishing.

Do that test on your own time and test again and again - and the benefits become clear. Smoother acceleration, neater more controlled backcast and slower tighter effortless forward cast. Then introduce hauling and you'll see what that does - for sure it adds linespeed and all that good stuff but it also masks niggling little issues.

I think that probably sums my casting up too. Hauling being the be all and end all.

So do you reckon Magnus, that it is a case of "back to basics" for those of us who haul and then to reintroduce the haul?

Alex
Protect the edge.

Magnus

Hi Alex

It certainly does no harm. If you strip away the haul and cast a fixed line - trap the line don't hold it (see below) - you have the fundamental outfit. Its 'simply' then a matter of working on getting as smooth and easy as possible and making the sweetest loops possible. Practice curves, aerial mends (left and right and up and down), snake rolls and snaps. Throw in a bit of simple target practice - or more advanced target practice by insisting on having some slack between the rod and line and an accurate delivery.

Yes I know this all sound too serious, what can I say, I enjoy casting.

Then reintroduce the haul, or even more dramatic, take that well drilled stroke and set up a shooting head - damn distance gets easy  :D

(If you hold the line in your hand and don't haul you will probably move your rod hand away from the line hand into the backcast and bring it closer in the forward cast. Separating the hands is a proto-haul - bringing them closer together is effectively reducing the load on the rod - not good!)

Go To Front Page