Upside down dryfly revisited

A week or two ago the subject of the "Upside Down Dryfly" came up.
I think most of the important points got mentioned, by various
posters,
but this moroning I ran across the following link (actually a buddy
sent it to me).
This is a Japanese language site primarily, but it does have a
parallel set
of pages written in Englais. Note the earliest reference (1662)

http://www.kawanobooks.com/html/En/e081.html

upside-down fly　　English　《fly》
　 A fly in which the hook is used upside down.　As for the oldest
description of an upside down fly, Col. Robert Venables in Britain
mentioned such a fly in the "The Experienced Angler" (1662).　The fly
was a mayfly imitation that had the wing attached to the point side of
a hook.　At the time, many people imitated this pattern, and it was
also called reversed-wing.　Because the hook point is in the air in
this pattern, it can be effective to catch overly sophisticated trout.
However, hooking is said to be somewhat difficult.
　 In the 1970s, Brian Clarke and John Goddard of Britain introduced a
series of upside down patterns, and called it the USD series.　Later on
Neil Patterson made an outstanding fly pattern called Funneldun as an
improved version of USD series.
　 In the United States, Joe Brooks introduced the Keel Fly in his book
"Trout Fishing" (1972).　In Japan, upside down flies have been often
called keel fly or keel style, however because Keel Fly is a company's
name, upside down fly is more desirable for use in common expression.
�Reference】A dictionary of fly-fishing, 1993 (1992).　The experienced
angler, 1969 (1662).　The trout and the fly, 1980.　Trout fishing, 1972.
→Robert Venables, USD Paradun series, Funnel Dun, Joe Brooks, Trout
Fishing, keel fly

On Feb 25, 6:00 pm, "salmobytes" wrote:
A week or two ago the subject of the "Upside Down Dryfly" came up.
I think most of the important points got mentioned, by various
posters,
but this moroning I ran across the following link (actually a buddy
sent it to me).
This is a Japanese language site primarily, but it does have a
parallel set
of pages written in Englais. Note the earliest reference (1662)

http://www.kawanobooks.com/html/En/e081.html

upside-down fly　　English　《fly》
　 A fly in which the hook is used upside down.　As for the oldest
description of an upside down fly, Col. Robert Venables in Britain
mentioned such a fly in the "The Experienced Angler" (1662).　The fly
was a mayfly imitation that had the wing attached to the point side of
a hook.　At the time, many people imitated this pattern, and it was
also called reversed-wing.　Because the hook point is in the air in
this pattern, it can be effective to catch overly sophisticated trout.
However, hooking is said to be somewhat difficult.
　 In the 1970s, Brian Clarke and John Goddard of Britain introduced a
series of upside down patterns, and called it the USD series.　Later on
Neil Patterson made an outstanding fly pattern called Funneldun as an
improved version of USD series.
　 In the United States, Joe Brooks introduced the Keel Fly in his book
"Trout Fishing" (1972).　In Japan, upside down flies have been often
called keel fly or keel style, however because Keel Fly is a company's
name, upside down fly is more desirable for use in common expression.
�Reference】A dictionary of fly-fishing, 1993 (1992).　The experienced
angler, 1969 (1662).　The trout and the fly, 1980.　Trout fishing, 1972.
→Robert Venables, USD Paradun series, Funnel Dun, Joe Brooks, Trout
Fishing, keel fly

http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rbear/venables1.html

TL
MC

wrote:
"salmobytes" wrote:
A week or two ago the subject of the "Upside Down Dryfly" came up.
snip

http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rbear/venables1.html

Reposting the entire post to which you're responding only to add
one line, and nothing but a URL at that, is the kind of rude Usenet
behavior we've come to expect from newbies and morons. On top of
which it is the bane of bottom posting.

--
Ken Fortenberry

"Ken Fortenberry" wrote in message
news:1bkEh.915
Reposting the entire post to which you're responding only to add
one line, and nothing but a URL at that, is the kind of rude Usenet
behavior we've come to expect from newbies and morons. On top of
which it is the bane of bottom posting.

--
Ken Fortenberry

whereas anal critiques of the posting styles of others, just
to continue a drivel-filled exchange with Mr. Connor is the sort of rude
Usenet behavior we've come to expect from you.........Give it a freaking
rest, willya?
Tom

Tom Littleton wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Reposting the entire post to which you're responding ...

.........Give it a freaking
rest, willya?

The Subject: did say "revisited" did it not ?

Bite me, Tommy.

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Feb 25, 1:20 pm, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:
Tom Littleton wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Reposting the entire post to which you're responding ...

.........Give it a freaking
rest, willya?

The Subject: did say "revisited" did it not ?

It did not say "self-loathing redefined and exemplified."

The good news is there ain't a damned thing you can do about
it.

Wolfgang
gawd, what an arse!

On Feb 25, 11:02 am, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

Reposting the entire post to which you're responding only to add
one line.

What I posted never before appeared on usenet.

....lonely, annoying little ankle-biting twerps on usenet do make
you wonder why you bother to participate.

On Feb 25, 9:04 pm, "salmobytes" wrote:

...lonely, annoying little ankle-biting twerps on usenet do make
you wonder why you bother to participate.

It's because they are amusing. Really. Trust me.

Wolfgang

Wolfgang wrote:
On Feb 25, 9:04 pm, "salmobytes" wrote:

...lonely, annoying little ankle-biting twerps on usenet do make
you wonder why you bother to participate.

It's because they are amusing. Really. Trust me.

Wolfgang



No - you're not.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On 25 Feb 2007 19:04:55 -0800, "salmobytes"
wrote:

On Feb 25, 11:02 am, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

Reposting the entire post to which you're responding only to add
one line.

What I posted never before appeared on usenet.

Um...yes, generally, it has, but...

...lonely, annoying little ankle-biting twerps on usenet do make
you wonder why you bother to participate.

....to whom are you replying?

HTH,
R
....you ain't one of them adventurous, reliable innovators, are ya?