|
|
The upside-down fly pattern
Today I have read an article about the upside-down fly design. Has any
one ever tied this pattern? Could you please share about your upside- down fly pattern? http://www.versacorp.cn Blog: http://www.versacorp.cn/default.asp |
The upside-down fly pattern
On Feb 7, 9:13 am, "Da" wrote:
Today I have read an article about the upside-down fly design. Has any one ever tied this pattern? Could you please share about your upside- down fly pattern? .....never heard of an upside down fly before. What article did you read? Where was the article? |
The upside-down fly pattern
salmobytes wrote:
"Da" wrote: Today I have read an article about the upside-down fly design. Has any one ever tied this pattern? Could you please share about your upside- down fly pattern? ....never heard of an upside down fly before. What article did you read? Where was the article? He could be talking about the Waterwisp. http://www.waterwisp.com/ -- Ken Fortenberry |
The upside-down fly pattern
On Feb 7, 11:13 am, "Da" wrote:
Today I have read an article about the upside-down fly design. Has any one ever tied this pattern? Could you please share about your upside- down fly pattern? http://www.versacorp.cn Blog:http://www.versacorp.cn/default.asp One of my favorite fly pattern's is an upside down parachute adams like fly that i call the reverse adams. To tie it is simple; put your fly in the vice upside down, that is, with the point up and the shank down, then tie the typical fly patern on the high side of the hook. when finished the fly's parachute will hold the point from spinning back down into the water. the fly sits on the water with the hook point in the air. enjoy, its one of my favorites for brookies |
The upside-down fly pattern
"salmobytes" wrote ....never heard of an upside down fly before. What article did you read? Where was the article? there are several variations out there ... all designed to keep the bend of the hook up during the float. FWIW, all the ones I've tried sucked every place except in the vise and in pictures, poor hookers, poor floaters. |
The upside-down fly pattern
One of my favorite fly pattern's is an upside down parachute adams like fly that i call the reverse adams. ..........ahhhhh. A Parachute with a hook that points up. Makes great logical sense. I tried it, many years ago, and what I tied had a tendency to land upside down, or to land on its side. So I abandoned it. Seems to work for you, however. |
The upside-down fly pattern
On Feb 7, 1:53 pm, "salmobytes" wrote:
One of my favorite fly pattern's is an upside down parachute adams like fly that i call the reverse adams. .........ahhhhh. A Parachute with a hook that points up. Makes great logical sense. I tried it, many years ago, and what I tied had a tendency to land upside down, or to land on its side. So I abandoned it. Seems to work for you, however. If your post (middle of parachute, typically calf tail) is long enough, and the hackle your using is long enough it will stay floating the right way. its good for light hitting fish, because the hook is already pointing up, so you hook them right on the nose. jules, see you on the water. |
The upside-down fly pattern
Today I have read an article about the upside-down fly design. Has any
one ever tied this pattern? Brian Clarke and John Goddard, Brits, in their book The Trout and the Fly, discuss this fly design at length and provide illustrated step-by-step tying instructions. There was also did a program on Public Television (in the USA) titled "Educated Trout" in which they did the same. vince |
The upside-down fly pattern
On Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:23:22 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
wrote: salmobytes wrote: "Da" wrote: Today I have read an article about the upside-down fly design. Has any one ever tied this pattern? Could you please share about your upside- down fly pattern? ....never heard of an upside down fly before. What article did you read? Where was the article? He could be talking about the Waterwisp. http://www.waterwisp.com/ I didn't see, so I didn't follow his link, and have no intention of looking for it, but simply from the information at hand, I suspect he may be talking about keel flies...there was at least one book in the 70s about these...I've "tied" (really, made - it's more that a tie) snagless Sallies for bass this way. Keels are a special-purpose fly/lure, on a special hook, and unless recipe supports it and the reason is there, there's, um, well, no reason. And in fact, simply tying any ol' fly upside down can take a decent recipe and **** it up. TC, R |
The upside-down fly pattern
On 7 Feb 2007 12:18:37 -0800, "jules" wrote:
On Feb 7, 1:53 pm, "salmobytes" wrote: One of my favorite fly pattern's is an upside down parachute adams like fly that i call the reverse adams. .........ahhhhh. A Parachute with a hook that points up. Makes great logical sense. I tried it, many years ago, and what I tied had a tendency to land upside down, or to land on its side. So I abandoned it. Seems to work for you, however. If your post (middle of parachute, typically calf tail) is long enough, and the hackle your using is long enough it will stay floating the right way. its good for light hitting fish, because the hook is already pointing up, so you hook them right on the nose. jules, see you on the water. On the nose, huh? Well, the joke will be on you if they are wearing those fake nose-and-glasses things... |
The upside-down fly pattern
On Feb 7, 7:17 pm, vincent p. norris wrote:
Brian Clarke and John Goddard, Brits, in their book The Trout and the Fly, discuss this fly design at length and provide illustrated step-by-step tying instructions. FWIW: (for what little it's worth) The first fly tying article I wrote was a piece about a bottom-mounted parachute mayfly dun, published in Dick Surrette's Fly Tyer in 1978. I tied that fly with an upturned hook--for a while--but by by the time I wrote about it (substantially pre-dating Goddard et al) I had already abandoned the upturned hook, because it all-too-often landed upside down, and the Parachute post all-too-often acted like a weedless hook guard, that kept the fly from hooking properly. It sounds like others have made this (difficult to tie) fly work for them, but it didn't work for me. The bottom mounted parachute fly I published in 1978 had a down-pointing hook. |
The upside-down fly pattern
Ken Fortenberry wrote in news:eWnyh.16806
: salmobytes wrote: "Da" wrote: Today I have read an article about the upside-down fly design. Has any one ever tied this pattern? Could you please share about your upside- down fly pattern? ....never heard of an upside down fly before. What article did you read? Where was the article? He could be talking about the Waterwisp. http://www.waterwisp.com/ If I recall, didn't they develop a rep for driving the hook into the brain? -- Scott Reverse name to reply |
The upside-down fly pattern
On Feb 7, 11:25 pm, wrote:
On Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:23:22 GMT, Ken Fortenberry wrote: salmobytes wrote: "Da" wrote: Today I have read an article about the upside-down fly design. Has any one ever tied this pattern? Could you please share about your upside- down fly pattern? ....never heard of an upside down fly before. What article did you read? Where was the article? He could be talking about the Waterwisp. And in fact, simply tying any ol' fly upside down can take a decent recipe and **** it up. If you choose to strictly follow other people's paterns and never try to push your own creative fly tying ability, that's your loss. the fly that i tie works just fine (reverse adams), as do many others that i tie based on variations of other well known flies. If you chose to use other people's designs thats fine, but don't discourage the adventurous tier from attempting their own variations, by saying that their "****ing up a decent recipe". not only is this ignorant, but without new fly variations, we wouldn't have any fly patterns to begin with. jules, see you on the water. |
The upside-down fly pattern
On 8 Feb 2007 06:54:53 -0800, "jules" wrote:
On Feb 7, 11:25 pm, wrote: On Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:23:22 GMT, Ken Fortenberry wrote: salmobytes wrote: "Da" wrote: Today I have read an article about the upside-down fly design. Has any one ever tied this pattern? Could you please share about your upside- down fly pattern? ....never heard of an upside down fly before. What article did you read? Where was the article? He could be talking about the Waterwisp. And in fact, simply tying any ol' fly upside down can take a decent recipe and **** it up. If you choose to strictly follow other people's paterns and never try to push your own creative fly tying ability, that's your loss. the fly that i tie works just fine (reverse adams), as do many others that i tie based on variations of other well known flies. If you chose to use other people's designs thats fine, but don't discourage the adventurous tier from attempting their own variations, by saying that their "****ing up a decent recipe". not only is this ignorant, but without new fly variations, we wouldn't have any fly patterns to begin with. First, learn to edit if you're going to snip. You may be right...since fly fishing and tying were only invented 6 or 8 years ago, how likely could it be that several unconnected someones haven't already tried what you might and published books about it...why, heck, I think you ought to try working on square baseballs, carts with the wheels on the top rather than the bottom (saves wear and tear on the tires, donchaknow), and a microwave oven that works by simply putting the zappicure-de-jour on the kitchen counter while the cook gets in a protective lead box.... Feel free to be as creative as wish, but fixing what isn't broken doesn't demonstrate much "imagination." There are no "new concepts" in fly-tying; there's a reason that you don't see more "upside-down" flies, and the fact that _you_ haven't "adventured" and attempted or imagined them yet ain't it. Hell, in much of what they tried to do, keel flies (which weren't a new concept 40 years ago) worked, yet try to go and find a package of keel hooks (and at one time, Mustad, Eagle Claw, and 3-4 others made them). And I never said _no_ pattern will work adapted to an "upside-down" or any other particular variation won't work, only that "tying any ol' fly upside down can take a decent recipe and **** it up." I was right then, and I'll be right after another 500-plus years of "modern-style" flytying. jules, see you on the water. Depends on where you fish. R ....and come, on - an "adventurous" tyer? Please...unless your tying consists of hand-ties using fresh black widow silk to lash large, live raptors to razor-sharp grappling hooks while tiger-hunting from a howdah on bull elephant that you personally selected for his short temper, you ain't essactly Francis ****in' Drake-meets-Robert Ruark... |
The upside-down fly pattern
On Feb 9, 8:49 am, wrote:
On 8 Feb 2007 06:54:53 -0800, "jules" wrote: On Feb 7, 11:25 pm, wrote: On Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:23:22 GMT, Ken Fortenberry wrote: salmobytes wrote: "Da" wrote: Today I have read an article about the upside-down fly design. Has any one ever tied this pattern? Could you please share about your upside- down fly pattern? ....never heard of an upside down fly before. What article did you read? Where was the article? He could be talking about the Waterwisp. And in fact, simply tying any ol' fly upside down can take a decent recipe and **** it up. If you choose to strictly follow other people's paterns and never try to push your own creative fly tying ability, that's your loss. the fly that i tie works just fine (reverse adams), as do many others that i tie based on variations of other well known flies. If you chose to use other people's designs thats fine, but don't discourage the adventurous tier from attempting their own variations, by saying that their "****ing up a decent recipe". not only is this ignorant, but without new fly variations, we wouldn't have any fly patterns to begin with. First, learn to edit if you're going to snip. You may be right...since fly fishing and tying were only invented 6 or 8 years ago, how likely could it be that several unconnected someones haven't already tried what you might and published books about it...why, heck, I think you ought to try working on square baseballs, carts with the wheels on the top rather than the bottom (saves wear and tear on the tires, donchaknow), and a microwave oven that works by simply putting the zappicure-de-jour on the kitchen counter while the cook gets in a protective lead box.... Feel free to be as creative as wish, but fixing what isn't broken doesn't demonstrate much "imagination." There are no "new concepts" in fly-tying; there's a reason that you don't see more "upside-down" flies, and the fact that _you_ haven't "adventured" and attempted or imagined them yet ain't it. Hell, in much of what they tried to do, keel flies (which weren't a new concept 40 years ago) worked, yet try to go and find a package of keel hooks (and at one time, Mustad, Eagle Claw, and 3-4 others made them). And I never said _no_ pattern will work adapted to an "upside-down" or any other particular variation won't work, only that "tying any ol' fly upside down can take a decent recipe and **** it up." I was right then, and I'll be right after another 500-plus years of "modern-style" flytying. jules, see you on the water. Depends on where you fish. R ...and come, on - an "adventurous" tyer? Please...unless your tying consists of hand-ties using fresh black widow silk to lash large, live raptors to razor-sharp grappling hooks while tiger-hunting from a howdah on bull elephant that you personally selected for his short temper, you ain't essactly Francis ****in' Drake-meets-Robert Ruark... "Fly fishing and tying only started 6 or 8 years ago"????? hopefully you mean 60 or 80??? either way you need to check your sources, try uummm a hell of a lot longer ago than that. "fixing what ain't broken isn't imagination" well, its not a matter of fixing something thats not broken, rather, taking attributes of a tried and tested pattern, and adapting them to a new fly to get similar results with an ulterior specific purpose. there is no messing up designs involved with this logic, simply referencing anothers ideas to suit your needs. Besides, in the upside down flies case, i still keep the exact same fly ("the correct way") in my box anyways. "there's no new concepts in fly tying", what the hell kind of statement is that??? tiers have not tied _all_ the types of bugs in the world (that fish eat), n'or have they developed _all_ the possible methods to produce any given representation of already existing flies. Hence, in order to do so, they would have to "invent" new tactics to accomplish this. The fact that you would create such a rediculous comparison between a simple fly variation and "square baseballs" and "widow silk wrapped raptors", just demeans yourself. The soul purpose of writing my initial comment, was to illuminate the fact that i had addapted a pattern to better suit my needs, and that it worked just fine in my experience, also, that maybe this person should give it a try. This has turned into a question of whether or not a person can be creative in their own right. my simple conclusion for you is; if you don't want to try my fly, fine don't try it. but if you are going to start discouraging polite people from having a discussion about something that they might be interested in trying, i say shame on you. Fishing is a sport which alows an idividual to grow and expand their knowledge and happiness, not create stress over whether or not a fly is exact to receipy or if their variation is any good or not. Variations is how we discover, and is the reason why we continue to tie. See you on the water. Jules. |
The upside-down fly pattern
On 9 Feb 2007 09:33:59 -0800, "jules" wrote:
On Feb 9, 8:49 am, wrote: If you choose to strictly follow other people's paterns and never try to push your own creative fly tying ability, that's your loss. the fly that i tie works just fine (reverse adams), as do many others that i tie based on variations of other well known flies. If you chose to use other people's designs thats fine, but don't discourage the adventurous tier from attempting their own variations, by saying that their "****ing up a decent recipe". not only is this ignorant, but without new fly variations, we wouldn't have any fly patterns to begin with. First, learn to edit if you're going to snip. You may be right...since fly fishing and tying were only invented 6 or 8 years ago, how likely could it be that several unconnected someones haven't already tried what you might and published books about it...why, heck, I think you ought to try working on square baseballs, carts with the wheels on the top rather than the bottom (saves wear and tear on the tires, donchaknow), and a microwave oven that works by simply putting the zappicure-de-jour on the kitchen counter while the cook gets in a protective lead box.... Feel free to be as creative as wish, but fixing what isn't broken doesn't demonstrate much "imagination." There are no "new concepts" in fly-tying; there's a reason that you don't see more "upside-down" flies, and the fact that _you_ haven't "adventured" and attempted or imagined them yet ain't it. Hell, in much of what they tried to do, keel flies (which weren't a new concept 40 years ago) worked, yet try to go and find a package of keel hooks (and at one time, Mustad, Eagle Claw, and 3-4 others made them). And I never said _no_ pattern will work adapted to an "upside-down" or any other particular variation won't work, only that "tying any ol' fly upside down can take a decent recipe and **** it up." I was right then, and I'll be right after another 500-plus years of "modern-style" flytying. jules, see you on the water. Depends on where you fish. R ...and come, on - an "adventurous" tyer? Please...unless your tying consists of hand-ties using fresh black widow silk to lash large, live raptors to razor-sharp grappling hooks while tiger-hunting from a howdah on bull elephant that you personally selected for his short temper, you ain't essactly Francis ****in' Drake-meets-Robert Ruark... Second, learn to edit if you're going to snip... "Fly fishing and tying only started 6 or 8 years ago"????? hopefully you mean 60 or 80??? either way you need to check your sources, try uummm a hell of a lot longer ago than that. Then why would you hope I meant some other randomly-selected albeit wrong period of time? "fixing what ain't broken isn't imagination" well, its not a matter of fixing something thats not broken, rather, taking attributes of a tried and tested pattern, and adapting them to a new fly to get similar results with an ulterior specific purpose. there is no messing up designs involved with this logic, simply referencing anothers ideas to suit your needs. Besides, in the upside down flies case, i still keep the exact same fly ("the correct way") in my box anyways. "there's no new concepts in fly tying", what the hell kind of statement is that??? Oh, it probably has something to do with things like taking tried and tested patterns, adapting them, and referencing another's ideas when one is inventing totally new things... tiers have not tied _all_ the types of bugs in the world (that fish eat), n'or have they developed _all_ the possible methods to produce any given representation of already existing flies. Well, gollydamn! I never met anyone who knew what every single flytyer who has ever lived had done...I must say, I'm impressed! If I may, I've always wondered what a Mr. Clyde J. Slingass of Numbnuts, NY, tied on the second Saturday of April, 1934. Could you give me a brief outline? I'd be ever so grateful. BTW, I mean the father, who lived on Main Street, not the son, who lived on 2 Ave. He was kind of ass - you know the type, always thinking his stuff was all new and innovative and courageous and stuff... Hence, in order to do so, they would have to "invent" new tactics to accomplish this. The fact that you would create such a rediculous comparison between a simple fly variation and "square baseballs" and "widow silk wrapped raptors", just demeans yourself. The soul purpose of writing my initial comment, was to illuminate the fact that i had addapted a pattern to better suit my needs, and that it worked just fine in my experience, also, that maybe this person should give it a try. This has turned into a question of whether or not a person can be creative in their own right. my simple conclusion for you is; if you don't want to try my fly, fine don't try it. but if you are going to start discouraging polite people from having a discussion about something that they might be interested in trying, i say shame on you. Fishing is a sport which alows an idividual to grow and expand their knowledge and happiness, not create stress over whether or not a fly is exact to receipy or if their variation is any good or not. Variations is how we discover, and is the reason why we continue to tie. Uh-huh... See you on the water. ...knot if eye seize ewe phirst, R |
The upside-down fly pattern
wrote in message ... On 9 Feb 2007 09:33:59 -0800, "jules" wrote: On Feb 9, 8:49 am, wrote: If you choose to strictly follow other people's paterns and never try to push your own creative fly tying ability, that's your loss. the fly that i tie works just fine (reverse adams), as do many others that i tie based on variations of other well known flies. If you chose to use other people's designs thats fine, but don't discourage the adventurous tier from attempting their own variations, by saying that their "****ing up a decent recipe". not only is this ignorant, but without new fly variations, we wouldn't have any fly patterns to begin with. First, learn to edit if you're going to snip. You may be right...since fly fishing and tying were only invented 6 or 8 years ago, how likely could it be that several unconnected someones haven't already tried what you might and published books about it...why, heck, I think you ought to try working on square baseballs, carts with the wheels on the top rather than the bottom (saves wear and tear on the tires, donchaknow), and a microwave oven that works by simply putting the zappicure-de-jour on the kitchen counter while the cook gets in a protective lead box.... Feel free to be as creative as wish, but fixing what isn't broken doesn't demonstrate much "imagination." There are no "new concepts" in fly-tying; there's a reason that you don't see more "upside-down" flies, and the fact that _you_ haven't "adventured" and attempted or imagined them yet ain't it. Hell, in much of what they tried to do, keel flies (which weren't a new concept 40 years ago) worked, yet try to go and find a package of keel hooks (and at one time, Mustad, Eagle Claw, and 3-4 others made them). And I never said _no_ pattern will work adapted to an "upside-down" or any other particular variation won't work, only that "tying any ol' fly upside down can take a decent recipe and **** it up." I was right then, and I'll be right after another 500-plus years of "modern-style" flytying. jules, see you on the water. Depends on where you fish. R ...and come, on - an "adventurous" tyer? Please...unless your tying consists of hand-ties using fresh black widow silk to lash large, live raptors to razor-sharp grappling hooks while tiger-hunting from a howdah on bull elephant that you personally selected for his short temper, you ain't essactly Francis ****in' Drake-meets-Robert Ruark... Second, learn to edit if you're going to snip... "Fly fishing and tying only started 6 or 8 years ago"????? hopefully you mean 60 or 80??? either way you need to check your sources, try uummm a hell of a lot longer ago than that. Then why would you hope I meant some other randomly-selected albeit wrong period of time? "fixing what ain't broken isn't imagination" well, its not a matter of fixing something thats not broken, rather, taking attributes of a tried and tested pattern, and adapting them to a new fly to get similar results with an ulterior specific purpose. there is no messing up designs involved with this logic, simply referencing anothers ideas to suit your needs. Besides, in the upside down flies case, i still keep the exact same fly ("the correct way") in my box anyways. "there's no new concepts in fly tying", what the hell kind of statement is that??? Oh, it probably has something to do with things like taking tried and tested patterns, adapting them, and referencing another's ideas when one is inventing totally new things... tiers have not tied _all_ the types of bugs in the world (that fish eat), n'or have they developed _all_ the possible methods to produce any given representation of already existing flies. Well, gollydamn! I never met anyone who knew what every single flytyer who has ever lived had done...I must say, I'm impressed! If I may, I've always wondered what a Mr. Clyde J. Slingass of Numbnuts, NY, tied on the second Saturday of April, 1934. Could you give me a brief outline? I'd be ever so grateful. BTW, I mean the father, who lived on Main Street, not the son, who lived on 2 Ave. He was kind of ass - you know the type, always thinking his stuff was all new and innovative and courageous and stuff... Hence, in order to do so, they would have to "invent" new tactics to accomplish this. The fact that you would create such a rediculous comparison between a simple fly variation and "square baseballs" and "widow silk wrapped raptors", just demeans yourself. The soul purpose of writing my initial comment, was to illuminate the fact that i had addapted a pattern to better suit my needs, and that it worked just fine in my experience, also, that maybe this person should give it a try. This has turned into a question of whether or not a person can be creative in their own right. my simple conclusion for you is; if you don't want to try my fly, fine don't try it. but if you are going to start discouraging polite people from having a discussion about something that they might be interested in trying, i say shame on you. Fishing is a sport which alows an idividual to grow and expand their knowledge and happiness, not create stress over whether or not a fly is exact to receipy or if their variation is any good or not. Variations is how we discover, and is the reason why we continue to tie. Uh-huh... See you on the water. ..knot if eye seize ewe phirst, God, how it must hurt to be you! Hee, hee, hee. Wolfgang |
The upside-down fly pattern
On 9 Feb 2007 09:33:59 -0800, "jules" wrote:
R ...and come, on - an "adventurous" tyer? Please...unless your tying consists of hand-ties using fresh black widow silk to lash large, live raptors to razor-sharp grappling hooks while tiger-hunting from a howdah on bull elephant that you personally selected for his short temper, you ain't essactly Francis ****in' Drake-meets-Robert Ruark... "Fly fishing and tying only started 6 or 8 years ago"????? hopefully you mean 60 or 80??? either way you need to check your sources, try uummm a hell of a lot longer ago than that. He was being sarcastic. Many of the users and posters here tend to sarcasm at certain times. -- r.bc: vixen Minnow goddess.Speaker to squirrels, willow watcher, etc.. Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless. Really. http://www.visi.com/~cyli |
The upside-down fly pattern
On Feb 7, 9:13 am, "Da" wrote:
Today I have read an article about the upside-down fly design. Has any one ever tied this pattern? Could you please share about your upside- down fly pattern? http://www.versacorp.cn Blog:http://www.versacorp.cn/default.asp upside down indeed........... The original poster (for this thread) was commercial fly manufacturer from China. He must be thinking "and these people (who voted for George Bush) have their fingers on the bomb?" Now that I think about it, I feel the same way. eeeeeeeeeEEEEEEEEEHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaa hhhhhhh |
The upside-down fly pattern
"salmobytes" wrote in message oups.com... upside down indeed........... The original poster (for this thread) was commercial fly manufacturer from China. He must be thinking "and these people (who voted for George Bush) have their fingers on the bomb?" Now that I think about it, I feel the same way. eeeeeeeeeEEEEEEEEEHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaa hhhhhhh lol.... Wondering what the Cantonese version looks like on his monitor. fwiw, -tom |
The upside-down fly pattern
On Feb 8, 12:25�am, wrote:
On Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:23:22 GMT, Ken Fortenberry wrote: salmobytes wrote: "Da" wrote: Today I have read an article about the upside-down fly design. Has any one ever tied this pattern? Could you please share about your upside- down fly pattern? ....never heard of an upside down fly before. What article did you read? Where was the article? He could be talking about the Waterwisp. http://www.waterwisp.com/ I didn't see, so I didn't follow his link, and have no intention of looking for it, but simply from the information at hand, I suspect he may be talking about keel flies...there was at least one book in the 70s about these...I've "tied" (really, made - it's more that a tie) snagless Sallies for bass this way. *Keels are a special-purpose fly/lure, on a special hook, and unless recipe supports it and *the reason is there, there's, um, well, no reason. *And in fact, simply tying any ol' fly upside down can take a decent recipe and **** it up. TC, R Some searches on Google using the terms "upside down fly" and "USDB" will return several pages. For starters you can take a look at: http://hometown.aol.com/cebushnell/page17.html it's gives a good review of the History of Upside Down Patterns as well as some patterns. Salmo |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:57 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2006 FishingBanter