Best rod/line for ....

Larry L wrote:
"rw" wrote


When you see two rise forms in sequence it's tempting to cast to where you
extrapolate the fish will be next. This is, I believe, a mistake. Fish
feeding on the surface of stillwater move randomly. I cast directly to the
last rise form. If that doesn't get a take I start searching around it.




On Hebgen, after a few days of heavy hatches, the fish DO become predictable
and you can plot their path and intercept it.

Maybe, but I'm skeptical.

I don't know about you, but I can't see fish under stillwater from a
pontoon boat or a kick boat -- unless I'm right on top of them -- so I
don't know which direction they've headed after a rise.

I have, however, watched trout feeding on the top of stillwater from
heights. It's fascinating (and really fun if you're directing an
otherwise blind caster, and even more fun when you're the caster).

In stillwater, watching from a height, I can't accurately predict where
a fish is going after taking a natural on the surface. Its path is like
slowed-down Brownian motion on a plane. Sometimes they move straight
ahead, and sometimes they veer off at an angle.

In moving water trout clearly have favored routes -- the way they use
large eddy pools, for example. Stillwater is very different, IMO.

From a kickboat, all I see are rises. If one fish is rising, the odds
are good that several are rising. I can't tell which rise matches which
fish, UNLESS the rises are very close to one another. They often are.
Then it's probably the same fish.

That's why I cast directly at a rise form. Its the most likely location
for the fish. At 70', Larry's range, I'd probably miss by a good margin
anyway, but it's nice to aim at something. Even you don't get a take
there's the satisfaction of a good cast.

Obversely, from the fish's point of view, the most likely place to find
a natural while expending the least energy is close to where it found
the last one, and if that doesn't work after awhile then move slowly in
a more-or-less random direction while avoiding bigger fish. :-) If
you're quick enough with your cast the fish won't have moved far and
will be within your casting error.

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

In article ,
Larry L writes

I know that casting skill is the real key, but I suk and am thinking that,
maybe, one of the superfast rods and long taper Weight forward lines might
make it easier ... or maybe, a fast rod and a DT line two sizes "too small"
... or, maybe, some other magic bullet to make up for the sucking sounds my
casts always make.

Right - casting skills DO count. I wouldn't discount a DT line and
would advocate a roll cast to aerialize you line prior to some false
casting. As for presentation, the WF won't do that bit too well as it is
intended to aid the long caster get his line way out.

We tend to use heavier tackle in the UK and I would probably use
something like a 9ft 6ins rod wt 6/8 or even 7/9 for such situations.
--
Bill Grey

On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 17:03:17 -0800, rw
wrote:

Larry L wrote:
For several years I've been trying to improve my performance in one specific
fishing situation. I'm hoping to make this improvement via buying new
stuff as the only other apparent choice would be increased skill ... i.e.
not likely to happen

The Scene: You are sitting in a boat/ kickboat/ float tube and have just
laid out a long ( for me this is about 70 feet or maybe a bit more ... you
can visualize 90 to 110 to suit your skills ) to the "12 O'Clock position
... floating line, #16 dry fly. A fish starts rising, quickly moving
through your area, at the 3 O'Clock or 9 O'Clock position, again a long cast
away. You need to get your line in the air, it's direction changed, and
a reasonably gentle presentation ( stillwater, very flat, spooky fish ) made
... and ASAP.

That's a tough situation. I'd strip in as fast as possible until I have
maybe 30 or 40 feet of line out, pick up the line and make some false
casts to dry the fly and make double hauls to get the line out (false
casting AWAY from the fish), and then present it as delicately as I
could, aiming right at the last rise form.

The tackle is irrelevant.

I like this solution. It would be difficult to pick up 70+ feet of
line and cast from 12 to 3 in one move.

I believe, however, the the Winston BIIx rod (the longer the better)
would be of help in this situation.

My only concern would be setting the hook at such a distance. I was
fishing for brook trout in Labrador a couple of years ago and the only
way to get them was to cast 70 feet to rising fish. At first I had
trouble setting the hook, but with practice I managed quite well. I
doubt I could set it at 100 feet, however.

Of course this Winston isn't cheap, but it *is* a wonderful rod.

Dave

"Larry L" wrote in message
...

The Question for those of you that keep up with equipment technology: At
this point in time, what specific combination of rod/ line is available
that YOU feel will do this one thing ... pick up a long line and represent
it in a new direction at a distance .... best ( money no object :-)
...or best ( money must be considered as you only do this particular
fishing 3 or 4 days/ year )


Winston 91/2' BIIx 5wt and the SA Sharkskin line.

"Wayne Knight" wrote



Winston 91/2' BIIx 5wt and the SA Sharkskin line.



You know anyone doing subprime loans for tackle G


actually this is the exact selection I had dreamed of, from reading the
adman hype, but I've never cast either the rod or the line

"Larry L" wrote in message
...

You know anyone doing subprime loans for tackle G

Put some money a way here and a little away there or do what I did and buy
the blank and the components and had someone make the rod (or make it
yourself). Then there's always the used market for the rod anyway.

actually this is the exact selection I had dreamed of, from reading the
adman hype, but I've never cast either the rod or the line

I know you don't want to buy into it but it's not hype on that fly line. For
$40 more than a standard premium line it had better not be. I'm a slow
action caster and most of my graphite trout rods were designed to mimic cane
and for fishing less than 60' away. But I can shoot that line within 10' of
the backing with an old Winston IM6. As far as fishing, if that line floated
any higher it would be hovering. But the texture is really different and the
noise it makes going through the guides casting takes some getting used to
but it is a very good fly line. Personally I'd start there..

With Winston's latest toy - the biimx, I shot the entire line plus some
backing at the retention pond behind my house. But I wouldn't fish the BIImx
with small flies though it has some flex in it, that's why I suggested the
BIIx instead. It's really is a nice rod if one wants a rod that is capable
of casting just as well up close as it does at a distance and very good as a
fishing tool, especially protecting light tippets.

"Wayne Knight" wrote


I know you don't want to buy into it but it's not hype on that fly line.
For $40 more than a standard premium line it had better not be. I'm a slow
action caster and most of my graphite trout rods were designed to mimic
cane and for fishing less than 60' away. But I can shoot that line within
10' of the backing with an old Winston IM6. As far as fishing, if that
line floated any higher it would be hovering. But the texture is really
different and the noise it makes going through the guides casting takes
some getting used to but it is a very good fly line. Personally I'd start
there..


I'll get one the next time I shop for a new line ... I'm cheap, but I DO
believe that the fly line and leader are the two most important pieces of
tackle. As you say $40 ain't much if it's a big, real, improvement in a fly
line.



, that's why I suggested the
BIIx instead. It's really is a nice rod if one wants a rod that is capable
of casting just as well up close as it does at a distance and very good as
a fishing tool, especially protecting light tippets.

I've heard nothing but raves about the rod, and from many different people.
I already have a stop in Twin Bridges ( right? I remember seeing the place
and think that is where ) planned for the summer to test the rod. I
hope to fish the Beaverhead, Big Hole, Poindexter and the Ruby more than I
have in past 'name collecting' trips and stay in that area for some time
this summer.

On Dec 28, 11:25 pm, "Wayne Knight" wrote:

e and very good as a
fishing tool, especially protecting light tippets.

That is also a very good point. Quite a few people don´t like the TCR
´s ( even overlined) because they say they are too stiff/fast, wont
protect fine tippet at all, and are "poor" fishing tools. I don´t
agree with this, I have used a couple of them for fishing, and cast a
couple more. Although the models within the range vary widely in their
precise action and properties ( i.e. a TCR #6 is not just a more
powerful version of a TCR #5 ), they basically do what it says on the
tin.

They are extremely difficult to load at close range with the rated
lines, and I would not even consider using them for close range dry
fly fishing for instance, or indeed any other close range fishing.
There are many rods much better suited. For general still water and
large river fishing, allowing quite a number of methods, they are
excellent rods.

Unfortunately I don´t know anything at all about the Winstons, or the
other line which has been mentioned, but I would tend to accept
Mr.Knights´s take on it, especially in view of his past reviews and
comments on various equipment. Always with the proviso that I would
not buy any equipment at all without trying it first myself, and I
certainly would not advise anybody else to do so either. His
recommendation for a specific purpose would get a rod on my short list
though, were I in the market for one.

Something which is very rarely mentioned at all, and never by various
manufacturers, is the simple fact that not only the objective "feel"
of a rod varies widely, but it also varies very widely among casters
for the same rod, and this is also because casting capabilities vary
very widely from abysmal to expert.

A really good caster can cast more or less anything, and he will
always be better than lesser casters, regardless of the equipment. He
will mostly prefer equipment suited to his style and type of fishing,
and he will likely use the best of that type available for his
fishing. Many intermediate casters are only really happy with or able
to use one particular type of rod, in a certain way.

There are lots of other reasons for some of these variations as well
of course. The pure cost of buying the very best equipment may deter
some, and they will compromise to suit their pockets.

One of the main reasons I built a fair number of blanks myself at one
time, was to try and obtain an optimum set of rods for my own fishing.
many of the commercial offerings, regardless of price, just did not
suit me for one reason or another. Up until fairly recently I still
used at least five of those rods regularly, and have still not found
anything better in the commercial ranges for my particular purposes,
although of course I have not tried them all, but more or less all of
the top models available here at least.

There is no such thing as a universal rod. Some are almost ideal for
some purposes, and completely lousy for others. But all of them depend
for optimum performance in any given situation on the caster´s/ angler
´s skill. NONE of them will improve your casting/catching beyond your
current abilities. The ONLY way to achieve that is to improve your
abilities.

TL
MC

On Dec 28, 1:37 am, "Larry L" wrote:


The Question for those of you that keep up with equipment technology: At
this point in time, what specific combination of rod/ line is available that
YOU feel will do this one thing ... pick up a long line and represent it in
a new direction at a distance .... best ( money no object :-) ...or best
( money must be considered as you only do this particular fishing 3 or 4
days/ year )

Rod weight? I'm flexible, but fly size will be #14 to #18, conditions calm
to light breeze, stillwater and spooky fish ... long casts ( for me ) a must

A 9´ TCR #5 http://www.sageflyfish.com/default.asp?p=24

with a #6 XXD line http://www.sexyloops.com/tackle/xxd.shtml

Lift the line into the back cast with a powerful haul, point the rod
where you want the fly to go, and complete the forward cast and haul.
No false casting. Fishing small dry flies at distances greater than
50 feet is liable to be difficult anyway, even if you get the casting
right.

Although the equipment mentioned will do the job for you, you still
need the skill to use it. It is not cheap either. There may be cheaper
alternatives of course, but I don´t know of any which would be easily
available.

Of course you can use the rod and line for other things as well. Just
to use for a couple of days a year, it is not worth investing that
amount of money in it.

TL
MC

Just another point there which bears repeating. Most people I see
trying to change direction when casting, do it by making a number of
false casts. This is pointless. Although it may be counterintuitive,
the line will go where the rod tip goes, regardless of where it was
before. It is neither necessary nor sensible to make incremental
changes of direction by false casting.

If you make large direction changes, 90° or more, you will feel the
rod "twisting" in your hand. This will also work with any rod, but
some slow rods will give a very odd "feel" when you do it. It takes a
little getting used to.

The back cast should be out behind the rod, with no slack, immediately
before you cast to the new direction. It is easier to practice this a
little at shorter distances before you try lifting and changing
direction with a long line.

TL
MC