Newbie Question: What hopper pattern?

On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 20:05:10 -0800, Mike
wrote:

I am not your personal dictionary, look it up yourself.

Already did, Mike. Trailing is not in the dictionary as far as its
connection with fishing. The correct term is trolling, and your move
to correct the OP with "trailing" smacks of your pompous arrogant
atttitude on this and other forums.

On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 20:23:36 -0800, Mike
wrote:

That fly does not work very well, because it either floats too high,
or sinks. Hoppers sit with their bodies in the film.Chenille bodied
flies are not usually much use as dry flies, even when treated with
various floatants.

Horse puckies. Joe's Hopper works very well and it does so because of
the chennile body. It is the chinnele body on Harry Mason's Killer
Caddis that makes it such a successful fly.

Correct. It works well *because* of the chennile. The recipes for
it, however, show different body materials.

You have never fished the waters that BJ Conner has fished. Your
statements about hopper patterns are *theory*. BJ's statements are
based on *proven fact*, no theory involved. He fished Joe's Hopper
successfully on many waters in the U.S. Have you ever fished *any*
hopper pattern, especially the one you endorse, in the U.S.? If the
answer is no, then you don't know what you are talking about.

LaCourse

On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 05:49:05 -0000, BJ Conner
wrote:

So while you may have some technical knowledge of gear and some
knowledge of pay-pond German trout you don't know **** from wild honey
when it comes to real fish in the real world.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. That is "**** and Shinola". d;o)

Dave LaCourse wrote:

On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 20:05:10 -0800, Mike
wrote:


I am not your personal dictionary, look it up yourself.


Already did, Mike. Trailing is not in the dictionary as far as its
connection with fishing. The correct term is trolling, and your move
to correct the OP with "trailing" smacks of your pompous arrogant
atttitude on this and other forums.



Taken from THE RANDOM HOUSE DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
[unabridged version]:

"trail": [def. #14] - "to fish by trailing a line from a moving boat;
troll."


jeff

On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 09:24:19 -0500, jeff
wrote:

"trail": [def. #14] - "to fish by trailing a line from a moving boat;
troll."

I stand corrected on the dictionary fact. It is, however, not called
trailing in the U.S. And I believe you know that.

Dave

On Nov 9, 6:13 am, Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 05:49:05 -0000, BJ Conner

wrote:
So while you may have some technical knowledge of gear and some
knowledge of pay-pond German trout you don't know **** from wild honey
when it comes to real fish in the real world.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. That is "**** and Shinola". d;o)

I know, I know I was giving him a break. Do you realize how much
time he would have spent on google trying to find out what Shinola
is. %^)]

"MC" wrote in message
...

Also, the fly Oakiedokey posted has a normal chenille or wool body;

http://www.flyanglersonline.com/flyt.../3198fotw.html

which is why in my opinion it wont work very well.

Just yesterday, that wasn't an opinion, it was a fact. In either case, one
supposes it must be a great comfort, in a life that reportedly has so few,
to know that one can still trump the many years of other people's combined
experience with a simple statement unencumbered (thus far, anyway) by
experience of one's own.

Dressed with the right poly yarn, which is hydrophobic, it will work a lot
better.

Dressed with a bit of much deserved humility, this would work much better.

Wolfgang

On 9 Nov, 16:20, "Wolfgang" wrote:
"MC" wrote in message

...



Also, the fly Oakiedokey posted has a normal chenille or wool body;

http://www.flyanglersonline.com/flyt.../3198fotw.html

which is why in my opinion it wont work very well.

Just yesterday, that wasn't an opinion, it was a fact. In either case, one
supposes it must be a great comfort, in a life that reportedly has so few,
to know that one can still trump the many years of other people's combined
experience with a simple statement unencumbered (thus far, anyway) by
experience of one's own.

Dressed with the right poly yarn, which is hydrophobic, it will work a lot
better.

Dressed with a bit of much deserved humility, this would work much better.

Wolfgang

What relevance has humility to the properties of fly-dressing
materials?

MC

On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 07:36:34 -0800, Mike
wrote:

On 9 Nov, 16:20, "Wolfgang" wrote:
"MC" wrote in message

...



Also, the fly Oakiedokey posted has a normal chenille or wool body;

http://www.flyanglersonline.com/flyt.../3198fotw.html

which is why in my opinion it wont work very well.

Just yesterday, that wasn't an opinion, it was a fact. In either case, one
supposes it must be a great comfort, in a life that reportedly has so few,
to know that one can still trump the many years of other people's combined
experience with a simple statement unencumbered (thus far, anyway) by
experience of one's own.

Dressed with the right poly yarn, which is hydrophobic, it will work a lot
better.

Dressed with a bit of much deserved humility, this would work much better.

Wolfgang

What relevance has humility to the properties of fly-dressing
materials?

Gawd you are dense.

I don't like hopper patterns with wings and, especially, with legs.
Those features are completely superfluous, IMO, and unless perfectly
tied (and even WHEN perfectly tied) they tend to cause the tippet to twist.

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