On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 21:22:57 -0600, Willi wrote:



Many of the West's famous waters are tailwaters. They do produce big
fish but give people a distorted view of what most of the fishing is
like in the Rockies. 90% + of our waters are freestone streams and
rivers with fish that definitely don't "demand" long leaders, small
flies and thin tippet.

Willi


First, good to see you around, and second, your word "demand" above
should give one pause for thought: why in the heck would anyone want to
do _any_ fishing that allegedly "demand"ed anything like a bunch of
technology/math/deep thinking?

All this thought and gear and science/math and bull**** going into what,
at least IMO, is supposed to be a fun, relaxing, and easy-going thing
that one gradually learns more and more about, not a ****ing hostage
rescue or neurosurgury. Sheesh, when I read or hear someone say
something like Steve's "technically demanding fishing is sweeter,"
followed by a bunch of technocrap they used to overcome the supposed
challenge, all I think is that they have missed and are missing a large
part of what makes fishing fishing. Anyway, such allegedly-demanding
fishing is not, at the end of the day, really all that challenging _to
the user_ if one overcomes it with a bunch of
math/science/technology/overpriced crap, er, gear. You want
_personally_ demanding? Go out there in your BVDs and try to catch 'em
with your hands.

Heck, I've fished for weeks in "the west" with nothing more than a few
flies (and granted, moderate supplies to tie more, if needed), a spool
of 4x or 5x tippet, 5 rods and reels among 4 people, and caught fish
while also having about as much fun as I figure is possible. Oh, sure,
putting _some_ thought into the thing is, I suppose, inevitable, but
when the discussion starts into "the cosign of the inverse square root
of the loading factor times the Kreh number squared PROVES that this
is better than that" and "as Clyde J. Slingbait pointed out in the
third edition of his 1498-page, 8-pound opus, _The Size 16 Hook - An
In-Depth Look_" nonsense, some shtick injection is, well, mandatory.

To sum up, paraphrasing Willie Nelson, I believe I'd have to hurt a man
for puttin' mathematics in my fishing...

TC,
R

On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 20:49:10 -0600, rw
wrote:

Willi wrote:

rw wrote:




With a typical 5 wt. rod you can play a fish as hard with 7x tippet as
with 5x tippet, or even with 2x tippet.


Bull****

You never use 7x tippet so you don't know what the **** you're talking
about. The only time I've seen you use 7x tippet (or maybe it 6x) was
when you were using MY rod, and you caught and brought to hand a fish,
and reached for the tippet to land it. I told you not to do it, that the
tippet would break, but you did it anyway. And it broke when the fish
struggled, and you lost my damn fly.


I will admit, however, that fine tippet was probably not justified in
that situation.

Maybe you should have used some shoelaces...of course, all else equal,
they wouldn't have been justified in that situation, either...

wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 21:22:57 -0600, Willi wrote:

Many of the West's famous waters are tailwaters. They do produce big
fish but give people a distorted view of what most of the fishing is
like in the Rockies. 90% + of our waters are freestone streams and
rivers with fish that definitely don't "demand" long leaders, small
flies and thin tippet.

First, good to see you around, and second, your word "demand" above
should give one pause for thought: why in the heck would anyone want
to do _any_ fishing that allegedly "demand"ed anything like a bunch
of technology/math/deep thinking?

All this thought and gear and science/math and bull**** going into
what, at least IMO, is supposed to be a fun, relaxing, and easy-going
thing that one gradually learns more and more about, not a ****ing
hostage rescue or neurosurgury. Sheesh, when I read or hear someone
say something like Steve's "technically demanding fishing is sweeter,"
followed by a bunch of technocrap they used to overcome the supposed
challenge, all I think is that they have missed and are missing a
large part of what makes fishing fishing. Anyway, such
allegedly-demanding fishing is not, at the end of the day, really all
that challenging _to the user_ if one overcomes it with a bunch of
math/science/technology/overpriced crap, er, gear. You want
_personally_ demanding? Go out there in your BVDs and try to catch
'em with your hands.

Heck, I've fished for weeks in "the west" with nothing more than a few
flies (and granted, moderate supplies to tie more, if needed), a spool
of 4x or 5x tippet, 5 rods and reels among 4 people, and caught fish
while also having about as much fun as I figure is possible. Oh,
sure, putting _some_ thought into the thing is, I suppose,
inevitable, but when the discussion starts into "the cosign of the
inverse square root of the loading factor times the Kreh number
squared PROVES that this is better than that" and "as Clyde J.
Slingbait pointed out in the third edition of his 1498-page, 8-pound
opus, _The Size 16 Hook - An In-Depth Look_" nonsense, some shtick
injection is, well, mandatory.

To sum up, paraphrasing Willie Nelson, I believe I'd have to hurt a
man for puttin' mathematics in my fishing...

I'd have to agree. Sure, I like to think about the hatch going on and
matching it and make my presentation the best it can be (it still
sucks), but all that said, I don't think about it all *that* much. Some
of the biggest fish I've caught have been when I've thrown logic to the
wind and chucked a #14 Stimulator out there in the middle of a midge
storm.

I've gone fishing three times this week, caught nothing but small
brookies and baby 'bows, and can't imagine I'd have enjoyed it any more
if I'd been catching 20" fish. If fishing was about the techno-crap and
just catching lots of big fish, I would have quit long ago.

FWIW, I carry 6X and 7X, but rarely use it.
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

Willi, Stick around, mang!

Orale!

bruce h

R All this thought and gear and science/math and bull**** going into
R what, at least IMO, is supposed to be a fun, relaxing, and
R easy-going thing that one gradually learns more and more about, not
R a ****ing hostage rescue or neurosurgury.

A good analogue. However, the definition of what is "fun" varies from
person to person. For someone the fun may well be in what you consider
to be bull. Then again, it's a personal choice whether you want to
respect different views or not.

--
Jarmo Hurri

Commercial email countermeasures included in header email
address. Remove all garbage from header email address when replying,
or just use .

Well, I seem to find myself in a ****ing match about every two years or
so-- I suppose I'm due. May as well jump in with both feet and enjoy
myself.

rw wrote in
m:


Fine tippet is often crucial to presentation, depending on where you
fish, of course.


Your reply to him basically said that without a small tippet,
presentation can suck. Do we agree with that?


No, we can't agree with that. Fine tippet (6x or 7x) is required for
presentation in difficult and challenging conditions, and especially in
complex braided currents over educated fish.

So, without a small tippet, presentation can suck.

That's all I said.

Agreed--And Ken said absolutely nothing contradicting the concept, which
really isn't all that hard to grasp, that sometimes you need to go down in
tippet size to get a good presentation. Come on -- I know you can read
better than this. I know us engineers tend to think a little literally,
but this is going a little far.

My
meat-and-potatoes tippet is 5x, but I can leave it at home when I
dry-fly fish somewhere really serious.

There's a small creek here that I fish fairly regularly where 7x is pretty
much dictated, and size 24 flies commonly used. The fish range from about
6" to 11", with a fish bigger than 13" being a very rare occasion.

Ah hah! The "torturing the fish" argument! I always find this amusing
coming from someone whose pastime is hooking fish and reeling them in.

.... and then I enjoy releasing them and watching them swim away without
having to do CPR for 20 minutes. I got serious about fly fishing when I
decided that trout mortality with treble hooks was too high. If I thought
a fly fishing technique was particularly hard on a fish, I'd do my best to
avoid it. For example, when the water gets too hot here, that's bass
season. I haven't fished the trico's here on my favorite creek since it
became no kill, one of the best hatches of the year, because I personally
think the water's usually too warm. I wouldn't have a problem with this if
I were keeping the fish, or even had the option of keeping a fish I didn't
think would survive. We all have our comfort level.

With a typical 5 wt. rod you can play a fish as hard with 7x tippet as
with 5x tippet, or even with 2x tippet.

Perhaps I'll employ your tactic, and save that gem for some day when I need
a ludicrous post of yours for some argument (two years can fly by pretty
fast). Do you really believe that's true? Someday, perhaps we can fish
steelhead the Ontario tribs together. I'll use my T&T cannon of a 5wt with
2x (just a hair undergunned, given that particular rod--I prefer a 7wt or
8wt with 0x, but this rod can handle a steelhead, no problem), and you can
use the 5wt of your choice with 5x (I won't even hold you to the 7x). That
way, perhaps I can come to enjoy your other favorite debate tool and get
some freaky pleasure pointing out just how many fish you broke off compared
to me. It would appear that there's gotta be 5 or 6 good years of fun in
that (kidding aside, Myron, that's pretty strange stuff, and its fairly
unbecoming). Personally, my fondest fishing memories are of fishing
companions having a good time and enjoying each other's company. My memory
is challenged enough without having to carry the baggage of "who caught
what". Yeah, I'd rather catch fish, but how well or poorly I fish isn't
nearly as important as enjoying the experience as I'm having it. There's
enough goals and competitions in my work life. I don't have to carry that
bull**** to the stream with me. Perhaps when I reach retirement, I'll need
that kind of excitement again, but I hope not.

The more critical factor is
the size of the fly. OK, you can't point the rod at the fish and drag
them in across the current with 6x or 7x, but I don't play fish that
way.


Personally, I'd use the biggest tippet I could if I fished one of
those perversions of nature, the tailwater of the west, where monster
trout sip tiny flies. I just don't think I'd enjoy fighting a big
fish to near death on a 7x or 8x tippet. I probably wouldn't catch
many fish, but that might be why I avoid conditions like that.
That's not to say I would break off a big fish the moment I realized
I was undergunned, cause I don't think I would, but if I knew I was
as likely to catch an 18" fish as a 12" fish, I'd feel bad to be
using a tiny leader.

OK, now you're getting into the "eastern fishing" vs. "western
fishing" issue. Good work! Go for it, Scott!


There's a ton of western fishing that's not that style of tailwater, and I
hope some day I can get out west and participate. If my only fishing
option was routinely fighting 18" fish on 7x tippets, I don't think I'd do
too much fishing. If an 18" fish happened now and again on a 7x tippet, I
wouldn't cry about it too hard, especially in the cold of a tailwater.

Scott

Willi wrote in :

rw wrote:



With a typical 5 wt. rod you can play a fish as hard with 7x tippet as
with 5x tippet, or even with 2x tippet.

Bull****

Willi


Hey Willi--

Good to see you around!! Ya ever try out those woven nymphs??

Scott

"Ken Fortenberry" wrote in message
. ..
...I would never fish a dry
fly downstream.

How about a nymph?

Wolfgang
who has heard that some people do that.

"Tim J." wrote in message
...
...I've gone fishing three times this week, caught...baby 'bows...

Faintly ridiculous.

Knowing how quickly the little ones tire, I hope you at least used the
largest hawser you could find.

Wolfgang
who would, in a similar situation, post pictures......though, only for
sharing purposes.

Scott Seidman wrote:

rw wrote in
m:

With a typical 5 wt. rod you can play a fish as hard with 7x tippet as
with 5x tippet, or even with 2x tippet.


Perhaps I'll employ your tactic, and save that gem for some day when I need
a ludicrous post of yours for some argument (two years can fly by pretty
fast). Do you really believe that's true?

I just did an experiment. I tied on 6x tippet (can't find any 7x at the
moment) and tried to break it with my 5wt rod (a Sage SP). This is Rio
Powerflex tippet rated at 3.4lb test.

I couldn't break it by putting a bend in the rod about as far as I dared
to go. That says to me that I can put as much steady pressure on a fish
with 6x as I can with anything else.

Now it's true that 6x or 7x will break more easily if it's subjected to
shocks, like if you strike too hard, or if the fish jumps and you don't
lower the rod, or if you grab the tippet while landing it, or if it gets
hung up on something, or if you let the line and rod straighten out when
the fish makes a run. Also, the knots have to be tied very well and the
material has to be free of nicks and abrasions. It does require more
skill (or luck) to hook and play and land a large fish on light tippet,
but when it comes to steady pressure on the fish it makes no difference
at all.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.