|
|
Newbie questions -- after my 1st season of fishing
On Aug 14, 1:28 am, wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:04:31 -0700, Mike wrote: On Aug 13, 9:15 pm, Dave LaCourse wrote: Somebody just asked me another question about this. You and others here do not use shooting heads, by your own admission, and apparently based entirely on your non-use, and unfounded prejudice against something you obviously donīt know anything about, you continue to decry them, and give all sorts of "reasons" for not using them. I have been using heads for forty years. Doubtless, people reading this stuff, newbies or otherwise, will draw their own conclusions. Anyway, back to the question. Buying a double taper to "save money" because you can "turn it around" is pointless. You get ninety feet of double tapered fly-line, of which you usually use much less than half. The other half takes up a lot of room on the reel, often requiring a larger reel to accommodate it, it can not be shot very well , or very far, because it is too heavy, and it ends up all scrunched and coiled, so that even if you did wish to "turn it around" there would be little point in doing so. The only sensible way to use a double taper fly line, and to save money, is to cut it in half. This gives you two 45 foot single taper fly-lines, You can then use a smaller lighter reel, for longer distances you can shoot the backing line, and when the first half wears out, you still have the other half brand new in the box. Now this I agree with. This is of course a "shooting head", and it has a lot of advantages. But only for those with an open mind towards such things. This is not as absolute as you seem to wish to convey. Before you wander off again on the evils of shooting heads. This is simply half a double taper fly-line, it has all the advantages of any other DT line, up to 45 feet, (well over fifty feet, including leader and rod), and it can also be shot a long way if required. And this is simply wrong. What is generally considered a "shooting head" is NOT half of a DT with some form of running line as backing. If one were to take, for example, a 5 DT, and half it, and then tie one of those halves to running line, one would have some almost-useless-as-a-"shooting-head" rig that would be IAC, and thankfully for the novice in the context I've seen presented here, never used as a shooting head. Now, if one were to take about 1/3 or so off each end of an _appropriate_ 9 or 10 DT, toss the center bit, and tie one of those thirds to running line, and then use it on something like a 5 or 6 wt. rod for casting 60-plus ft./20-plus meters, one would have what one could call a shooting head. But anyone who suggests novice casters cobble together such a thing for short-range fishing is simply wrong. HTH, R I have not suggested "cobbling" anything together. The definition of a shooting head is as I stated, what people "consider" is not my problem. Using the "center bit" of a DT would result in a piece of heavy level belly line, extremely difficult to control. and more or less useless for any sensible fishing technique. There are people who use a piece of level lead core as "shooting heads", again for special purposes, but nobody in his right mind would advise a beginner to use such a thing, he would probably take his ear off with it. The taper is required for most sensible fishing. It may also be reversed, and one then has a "bass bug" taper. If you set up silly combinations, then you will only get silly results. I did not suggest any such ridiculous or useless combinations. The simplest form of shooting head, is half a DT. This will allow a considerable range of applications, without stressing the rod. As I already mentioned, you can use half a #8 DT on a #6 weight rod with impunity. It will cast better at close range, because the rod loads sooner, and it will also cut the wind better. It can also be used for distance casting. A full #6 DT weighs ~ 480 grains. All #6 wt rods are designed to cast a full line. Therefore, they will cast ANY line of the same weight. half a #8 DT weighs ~ 315 grains, which the rod will cast easily, In point of fact, one can use a short thirty foot head of 480 grains for maximum distance, short range heavy loading, ( bass bugs, pike flies etc) or a a wind cutter, made from the front thirty feet of a #12 weight DT, which weighs 380 grain, and is still well below the rod īs maximum loading. ALL ON THE SAME ROD a #6 weight, without stressing the rod, and without any other problems at all. Heads less than 30 feet become progressively more difficult to control and turn over, and are best avoided. If you want delicate presentation at long range using a #6 weight rod, then use sixty feet #6 DT line. If you want even more delicate presentation, use a full #5 weight DT. If you can aerialise this, you then have a ninety foot shooting head weighing 420 grains. If you want to baflle me with bull****, then you need better bull****. -- Regards and tight lines! Mike Connor http://www.mike-connor.homepage.t-online.de/ http://groups.google.co.uk/group/Flycorner?hl=en |
Newbie questions -- after my 1st season of fishing
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:16:00 -0700, Mike
wrote: On Aug 14, 12:51 am, wrote: On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:17:05 -0500, Ken Fortenberry wrote: Mike wrote: snip I have no problems at all accepting your disagreement on a sensible and logical basis. LOL !! Mike you have serious problems accepting any sort of disagreement at all. Your know-it-all pronouncements are the stuff of roff legend. Indeed, I would also accept it if you simply said "I just donīt like them". Entirely your prerogative. Like I said, shooting heads have their place but fishing for bass in central Illinois ain't one of them. And I strongly disagree with recommending to newbies that they cobble together cheap fly lines. In fact I always counsel newbies never to cheap out on the fly line. Go bargain hunting for fly rod, fly reel and flies if you must but never cheap out on the fly line because a cheap fly line can make fly fishing a miserable and trying experience. Well, technically, a WF line has a "head," and it is there to help "shoot" the line at longer distances, but until you get about 40 ft./12 meters plus or minus of line _off the reel_, depending on taper design, you ain't even to the "running" line, and until you get that 40'/12m _past the tiptop_, you _can't_ use it as a _shooting_ head in the generally-understood sense. That said, what most consider a "shooting head" (a separate head attached to pure "running" line) is totally unnecessary and could well be counter-productive, esp. for a novice, at short distances. Why? A whole bunch of reasons. With some rigged-up "shooting" head fishing at 20-30 feet, it's one more (unnecessary) connection to go wrong, it's one more connection that has to go through the guides (and at short distances, it'll be going through the guides fairly often), and more often than not, it'll turn _fly_ casting into "head chunking" for a novice and **** up the casting skills they are just beginning to acquire. Shooting heads aren't rated like lines - I have no idea how whatever "head(s)" Mike seems to be championing is/are rated. In no case is the average novice going to be able to fish at 20-30'/6-10m with the ease in which they can by simply getting a line whose weight matches the rating of their rod. Frankly, at such short distances, I can't see why anyone would want anything more than a DT, but that's why there's chocolate and vanilla. There are no laws preventing anyone from using whatever "shooting head" they wish at whatever distance, but I'd advise - strongly - that novices stay the hell away from any "shooting head," Mike's rig or otherwise, for short-distance work until they 1) have the experience to know what they need, and 2) that experience tells them they need a shooting head. And then, if that "experience" tells them they _need_ a "shooting head" for such short work, get more experience... TC, R Quite interesting for a change, at least you thought about it a bit. Unfortunately, like a couple of others, you seem rather confused about what a shooting head actually is. The line manufacturerīs definition of a shooting head, is "any piece of line attached to backing or shooting line by means of a knot" The Fly line manufacturerīs definition of a WF line is "Any piece of line with integrated backing or shooting line, which is then referred to as "running" line". So, there is no real difference between a WF line and shooting head, Yes and no. There is no difference with regard to the fact that the taper profile of both a "shooting head" and WF is different than a DT. But there's a lot of difference between a shooting head intended for a 7 and an 7WF. For example, take RIO (just because they were mentioned recently) - their "head" for 7s are 250 grain, 30 foot heads, whereas the first 30 feet of the 7s (WF or DT) are in the AFTMA range (around 185), but the entire 40-plus feet of the 7 WF "head" section is more in the 300 grain range, whereas half of a DT (at about 41 ft. per half) is going to be in the 220 grain range and will not have the taper profile of a "shooting head." And again IAC, if one is fishing to fish 20-40 feet/8-12m away, a "shooting head," however it is made, is not only useless, but all but unusable, and to suggest that novices attempt to rig up something is simply ****-poor advice. except for the ability to adjust the length and weight of a head by simply cutting it at the right length, and the fact that a shooting head may usually be shot further than a WF because lighter backing is used. Also, you and others seem determined to assume that heads are purely distance tools, this is not the case, they may be made up in any configuration one pleases, and for any number of special purposes. When the distances talked about are so short, a shooting head is most certainly a "distance tool" by comparison, and one novices don't need to worry about. I have a couple of sixty foot heads for special purposes, the main one being delicate presentation at extreme range on still waters. I also have 45 foot heads, which are merely half DT lines, which allows me to "overline" the appropriate rods thus allowing me to present heavy or bulky flies at close range,. or to reach out for distance if required, without stressing the rod. To whit, using #8 line rated head, on a #6 rated rod. Maybe you don't understand what type of fishing these guys are discussing - if you shoot a 45 ft. head and 45 feet of backing in much of US bass fishing (and certainly what is currently under discussion), you'll likely (and often) have the head and at least some of the backing on dry land...assuming you don't have it tangled hopelessly around the trees, bushes, and random other fishers... I've never knocked shooting heads and in fact, have readily said they have a place. But that place simply isn't with novices fishing at 20-40 feet, and really, for anyone for such work. HTH, R |
Newbie questions -- after my 1st season of fishing
On Aug 14, 2:09 am, wrote:
SNIP I've never knocked shooting heads and in fact, have readily said they have a place. But that place simply isn't with novices fishing at 20-40 feet, and really, for anyone for such work. HTH, R You should read what I write. There are very many things I donīt understand, but shooting heads and their application is not one of them. Indeed, the ideal application for a shooting head is for novices fishing at close range.Or indeed at any other range, simply because they are the best tool available for that purpose. I have been using them in my beginner classes for many years, very successfully, and I have taught hundreds of people to cast. They work well, and they are also cheaper and more efficient than any other line Beginners have no trouble loading a rod at close range with a matched head, it is much easier than trying to do it with the rated line. They can also "feel" what is happening better. Whereas with a WF line at the rod rating they canīt feel anything at all until a good length of line is beyond the rod tip, and they canīt get enough out to reach this point! They can also cast further more quickly and they can control the line more easily. There is also no chance of straining or damaging a rod, because the total head weight is less than the rodīs casting capability, and if used for distance, it is much easier to cast a head, because one always has the same weight of line outside the rod tip. learning the double haul is also easier with a head. WF Lines are simply inferior shooting heads, which rarely match the rods they are rated for, but earn a great deal of money for line manufacturers, and have been hyped for years as a result of that. Very successfully it seems, as you and your erstwhile allies in the great "anti-shooting-head campaign" bear ample witness. You keep giving me unfounded opinions, and wild constructs, I have given you simple facts. As I already remarked, if you want to baffle me with bull****, you need much better bull****. -- Regards and tight lines! Mike Connor http://www.mike-connor.homepage.t-online.de/ http://groups.google.co.uk/group/Flycorner?hl=en |
Newbie questions -- after my 1st season of fishing
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:47:08 -0700, Mike
wrote: I have explained it often enough, but you either donīt read what I write, or donīt care, so there is little point in my repeating it yet again. Mike, read my lips: NO ONE CARES. We are happy catching big brook trout, browns, rainbows and all the different species of salmon using...... wait for it.............. commercial WF lines No big deal. Egads! You are *finally* getting it. No big deal! Dave |
Newbie questions -- after my 1st season of fishing
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:16:16 -0500, Ken Fortenberry
wrote: I'm a bluegill fisherman using a 9' Winston 3wt, that's the most fun for me. Yes, but if you put a shooting head on it, you will find it much easier to cast, you will catch more fish, and they will be bigger. Honest. Really! |
Newbie questions -- after my 1st season of fishing
On Aug 14, 2:50 am, Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:47:08 -0700, Mike wrote: I have explained it often enough, but you either donīt read what I write, or donīt care, so there is little point in my repeating it yet again. Mike, read my lips: NO ONE CARES. We are happy catching big brook trout, browns, rainbows and all the different species of salmon using...... wait for it.............. commercial WF lines No big deal. Egads! You are *finally* getting it. No big deal! Dave Well if you donīt care, why are you making such a song and dance about it? The original poster will I hope go out and get himself a #8 DT, cut it in half, and use it to very great effect and with ease, on his #6 weight rod, in the wind, to cast larger flies if he wants to, and be very pleased indeed at the results. This will save him money, and improve his fishing, regardless of what you or anybody else has to say about it. If it were true that you "donīt care" , then you are the last person anybody should take any advice from. I care a great deal about giving good advice to novices, but what a stupid hidebound old fart like you has to say about is irrelevant to me. As you are obviously incapable of any sensible discussion, and think your totally uninformed and biased opinions are inviolate, I wont bother replying to any more of your silly missives. -- Regards and tight lines! Mike Connor http://www.mike-connor.homepage.t-online.de/ http://groups.google.co.uk/group/Flycorner?hl=en |
Newbie questions -- after my 1st season of fishing
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:02:33 -0700, Mike
wrote: On Aug 14, 1:28 am, wrote: On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:04:31 -0700, Mike wrote: On Aug 13, 9:15 pm, Dave LaCourse wrote: Somebody just asked me another question about this. You and others here do not use shooting heads, by your own admission, and apparently based entirely on your non-use, and unfounded prejudice against something you obviously donīt know anything about, you continue to decry them, and give all sorts of "reasons" for not using them. I have been using heads for forty years. Doubtless, people reading this stuff, newbies or otherwise, will draw their own conclusions. Anyway, back to the question. Buying a double taper to "save money" because you can "turn it around" is pointless. You get ninety feet of double tapered fly-line, of which you usually use much less than half. The other half takes up a lot of room on the reel, often requiring a larger reel to accommodate it, it can not be shot very well , or very far, because it is too heavy, and it ends up all scrunched and coiled, so that even if you did wish to "turn it around" there would be little point in doing so. The only sensible way to use a double taper fly line, and to save money, is to cut it in half. This gives you two 45 foot single taper fly-lines, You can then use a smaller lighter reel, for longer distances you can shoot the backing line, and when the first half wears out, you still have the other half brand new in the box. Now this I agree with. This is of course a "shooting head", and it has a lot of advantages. But only for those with an open mind towards such things. This is not as absolute as you seem to wish to convey. Before you wander off again on the evils of shooting heads. This is simply half a double taper fly-line, it has all the advantages of any other DT line, up to 45 feet, (well over fifty feet, including leader and rod), and it can also be shot a long way if required. And this is simply wrong. What is generally considered a "shooting head" is NOT half of a DT with some form of running line as backing. If one were to take, for example, a 5 DT, and half it, and then tie one of those halves to running line, one would have some almost-useless-as-a-"shooting-head" rig that would be IAC, and thankfully for the novice in the context I've seen presented here, never used as a shooting head. Now, if one were to take about 1/3 or so off each end of an _appropriate_ 9 or 10 DT, toss the center bit, and tie one of those thirds to running line, and then use it on something like a 5 or 6 wt. rod for casting 60-plus ft./20-plus meters, one would have what one could call a shooting head. But anyone who suggests novice casters cobble together such a thing for short-range fishing is simply wrong. HTH, R I have not suggested "cobbling" anything together. The definition of a shooting head is as I stated, what people "consider" is not my problem. Using the "center bit" of a DT would result in a piece of heavy level belly line, extremely difficult to control. and more or less useless for any sensible fishing technique. There are people who use a piece of level lead core as "shooting heads", again for special purposes, but nobody in his right mind would advise a beginner to use such a thing, he would probably take his ear off with it. The taper is required for most sensible fishing. It may also be reversed, and one then has a "bass bug" taper. If you set up silly combinations, then you will only get silly results. I did not suggest any such ridiculous or useless combinations. The simplest form of shooting head, is half a DT. This will allow a considerable range of applications, without stressing the rod. As I already mentioned, you can use half a #8 DT on a #6 weight rod with impunity. It will cast better at close range, because the rod loads sooner, and it will also cut the wind better. It can also be used for distance casting. A full #6 DT weighs ~ 480 grains. All #6 wt rods are designed to cast a full line. Assuming proper design and adherence to AFTMA standards, a 6 weight rod is designed to load properly with the weight of the first 30 feet of 6 line (also adhering to the standard). They are not designed to _aerialise_ the entire line, even one of their own weight-rating, and don't need to be, because to "cast" the entire line, one doesn't need to load the rod with the weight of the entire line. But yet again, even if they were designed to sling '73 Buicks with ease, one doesn't need more than about 20 feet of line to cast to fish 20-30 feet away. Therefore, they will cast ANY line of the same weight. half a #8 DT weighs ~ 315 grains, which the rod will cast easily, In point of fact, one can use a short thirty foot head of 480 grains for maximum distance, Well, **** fire and save matches...around 480 grains, you say? Well, why not just tie the line to the bullet of a .460 WM round, load 'er up, and BOOM! Distance, baby, distance! Fishing and buf hunting at one time! short range heavy loading, ( bass bugs, pike flies etc) or a a wind cutter, made from the front thirty feet of a #12 weight DT, which weighs 380 grain, and is still well below the rod īs maximum loading. ALL ON THE SAME ROD a #6 weight, without stressing the rod, and without any other problems at all. Heads less than 30 feet become progressively more difficult to control and turn over, and are best avoided. If you want delicate presentation at long range using a #6 weight rod, then use sixty feet #6 DT line. If you want even more delicate presentation, use a full #5 weight DT. If you can aerialise this, you then have a ninety foot shooting head weighing 420 grains. A 420 grain, 90 ft. aerialised "shooting head" on a 5wt., and for short-distance bass fishing to boot, huh? I don't remember offhand, but if the "novice" that started this thread is the same one who wondered about rod finishing, attempt to follow the above type of advice and you'll realize a large savings due to economics of scale... If you want to baflle me with bull****, then you need better bull****. Uh, yeah, OK. R |
Newbie questions -- after my 1st season of fishing
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:32:58 -0700, Mike
wrote: On Aug 14, 2:09 am, wrote: SNIP I've never knocked shooting heads and in fact, have readily said they have a place. But that place simply isn't with novices fishing at 20-40 feet, and really, for anyone for such work. HTH, R You should read what I write. You should, too... There are very many things I donīt understand, but shooting heads and their application is not one of them. Indeed, the ideal application for a shooting head is for novices fishing at close range.Or indeed at any other range, simply because they are the best tool available for that purpose. I have been using them in my beginner classes for many years, very successfully, and I have taught hundreds of people to cast. They work well, and they are also cheaper and more efficient than any other line Beginners have no trouble loading a rod at close range with a matched head, it is much easier than trying to do it with the rated line. They can also "feel" what is happening better. Whereas with a WF line at the rod rating they canīt feel anything at all until a good length of line is beyond the rod tip, and they canīt get enough out to reach this point! They can also cast further more quickly and they can control the line more easily. There is also no chance of straining or damaging a rod, because the total head weight is less than the rodīs casting capability, and if used for distance, it is much easier to cast a head, because one always has the same weight of line outside the rod tip. learning the double haul is also easier with a head. WF Lines are simply inferior shooting heads, which rarely match the rods they are rated for, but earn a great deal of money for line manufacturers, and have been hyped for years as a result of that. Very successfully it seems, as you and your erstwhile allies in the great "anti-shooting-head campaign" bear ample witness. You keep giving me unfounded opinions, and wild constructs, I have given you simple facts. As I already remarked, if you want to baffle me with bull****, you need much better bull****. No, really, you should... R |
Newbie questions -- after my 1st season of fishing
On Aug 14, 3:07 am, wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:02:33 -0700, Mike wrote: On Aug 14, 1:28 am, wrote: On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:04:31 -0700, Mike wrote: On Aug 13, 9:15 pm, Dave LaCourse wrote: Somebody just asked me another question about this. You and others here do not use shooting heads, by your own admission, and apparently based entirely on your non-use, and unfounded prejudice against something you obviously donīt know anything about, you continue to decry them, and give all sorts of "reasons" for not using them. I have been using heads for forty years. Doubtless, people reading this stuff, newbies or otherwise, will draw their own conclusions. Anyway, back to the question. Buying a double taper to "save money" because you can "turn it around" is pointless. You get ninety feet of double tapered fly-line, of which you usually use much less than half. The other half takes up a lot of room on the reel, often requiring a larger reel to accommodate it, it can not be shot very well , or very far, because it is too heavy, and it ends up all scrunched and coiled, so that even if you did wish to "turn it around" there would be little point in doing so. The only sensible way to use a double taper fly line, and to save money, is to cut it in half. This gives you two 45 foot single taper fly-lines, You can then use a smaller lighter reel, for longer distances you can shoot the backing line, and when the first half wears out, you still have the other half brand new in the box. Now this I agree with. This is of course a "shooting head", and it has a lot of advantages. But only for those with an open mind towards such things. This is not as absolute as you seem to wish to convey. Before you wander off again on the evils of shooting heads. This is simply half a double taper fly-line, it has all the advantages of any other DT line, up to 45 feet, (well over fifty feet, including leader and rod), and it can also be shot a long way if required. And this is simply wrong. What is generally considered a "shooting head" is NOT half of a DT with some form of running line as backing. If one were to take, for example, a 5 DT, and half it, and then tie one of those halves to running line, one would have some almost-useless-as-a-"shooting-head" rig that would be IAC, and thankfully for the novice in the context I've seen presented here, never used as a shooting head. Now, if one were to take about 1/3 or so off each end of an _appropriate_ 9 or 10 DT, toss the center bit, and tie one of those thirds to running line, and then use it on something like a 5 or 6 wt. rod for casting 60-plus ft./20-plus meters, one would have what one could call a shooting head. But anyone who suggests novice casters cobble together such a thing for short-range fishing is simply wrong. HTH, R I have not suggested "cobbling" anything together. The definition of a shooting head is as I stated, what people "consider" is not my problem. Using the "center bit" of a DT would result in a piece of heavy level belly line, extremely difficult to control. and more or less useless for any sensible fishing technique. There are people who use a piece of level lead core as "shooting heads", again for special purposes, but nobody in his right mind would advise a beginner to use such a thing, he would probably take his ear off with it. The taper is required for most sensible fishing. It may also be reversed, and one then has a "bass bug" taper. If you set up silly combinations, then you will only get silly results. I did not suggest any such ridiculous or useless combinations. The simplest form of shooting head, is half a DT. This will allow a considerable range of applications, without stressing the rod. As I already mentioned, you can use half a #8 DT on a #6 weight rod with impunity. It will cast better at close range, because the rod loads sooner, and it will also cut the wind better. It can also be used for distance casting. A full #6 DT weighs ~ 480 grains. All #6 wt rods are designed to cast a full line. Assuming proper design and adherence to AFTMA standards, a 6 weight rod is designed to load properly with the weight of the first 30 feet of 6 line (also adhering to the standard). They are not designed to _aerialise_ the entire line, even one of their own weight-rating, and don't need to be, because to "cast" the entire line, one doesn't need to load the rod with the weight of the entire line. But yet again, even if they were designed to sling '73 Buicks with ease, one doesn't need more than about 20 feet of line to cast to fish 20-30 feet away. Therefore, they will cast ANY line of the same weight. half a #8 DT weighs ~ 315 grains, which the rod will cast easily, In point of fact, one can use a short thirty foot head of 480 grains for maximum distance, Well, **** fire and save matches...around 480 grains, you say? Well, why not just tie the line to the bullet of a .460 WM round, load 'er up, and BOOM! Distance, baby, distance! Fishing and buf hunting at one time! short range heavy loading, ( bass bugs, pike flies etc) or a a wind cutter, made from the front thirty feet of a #12 weight DT, which weighs 380 grain, and is still well below the rod īs maximum loading. ALL ON THE SAME ROD a #6 weight, without stressing the rod, and without any other problems at all. Heads less than 30 feet become progressively more difficult to control and turn over, and are best avoided. If you want delicate presentation at long range using a #6 weight rod, then use sixty feet #6 DT line. If you want even more delicate presentation, use a full #5 weight DT. If you can aerialise this, you then have a ninety foot shooting head weighing 420 grains. A 420 grain, 90 ft. aerialised "shooting head" on a 5wt., and for short-distance bass fishing to boot, huh? I don't remember offhand, but if the "novice" that started this thread is the same one who wondered about rod finishing, attempt to follow the above type of advice and you'll realize a large savings due to economics of scale... If you want to baflle me with bull****, then you need better bull****. Uh, yeah, OK. R More bull****. There is no AFTMA or any other standard for fly rods. The only AFTMA standards are for fly lines. The rod manufacturers build rods of #5 weight and up to cast a FULL DT LINE. Otherwise the rod would be overloaded as soon as you had more than thirty feet out, and at double or triple that distance it would be seriously strained or broken. You donīt know **** from shinola sunshine, and it is quite pointless attempting to explain the difference to you. So I will simply cease. -- Regards and tight lines! Mike Connor http://www.mike-connor.homepage.t-online.de/ http://groups.google.co.uk/group/Flycorner?hl=en |
Newbie questions -- after my 1st season of fishing
Mike typed: On Aug 14, 2:50 am, Dave LaCourse wrote: On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:47:08 -0700, Mike wrote: I have explained it often enough, but you either donīt read what I write, or donīt care, so there is little point in my repeating it yet again. Mike, read my lips: NO ONE CARES. We are happy catching big brook trout, browns, rainbows and all the different species of salmon using...... wait for it.............. commercial WF lines No big deal. Egads! You are *finally* getting it. No big deal! Well if you donīt care, why are you making such a song and dance about it? Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the POTW. -- TL, Tim --------------------------- http://css.sbcma.com/timj/ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:19 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Đ2004 - 2006 FishingBanter