fenton
Active Member
Posts: 246
|
Post by fenton on Mar 10, 2009 21:40:22 GMT
Now that you are back SK, on a similar topic (new v old), please could you outline what you consider to be the main differences between traditional and modern speycasting? Pro's and con's of each would be good......
Not meaning to give you homework ;D
cheers
F
|
|
Speyducer
Advisory Board
Release to spawn another day
Posts: 4,123 
|
Post by Speyducer on Mar 10, 2009 22:00:27 GMT
Now that you are back SK, on a similar topic (new v old), please could you outline what you consider to be the main differences between traditional and modern speycasting? Pro's and con's of each would be good...... Not meaning to give you homework ;D cheers F Whilst not wishing to pre-empt Col's answer, IMO.... In respect of what some term 'Modern Spey Casting' a/ the pro's seem to have an unswerving favoritism b/ the cons include the minor detail that it's not 'better' than traditional Spey casting But down to basics..... If you have mastered traditional Spey casting, it is but a small step to add the underhand style of casting, and casting with shooting heads with ease. However, if you have only learned to cast with a shooting head, then it may be far more of a struggle to unlearn such habits if & when you try to gain mastery over traditional Spey casting. Discuss..... Mike |
|
|
|
Post by salmonking on Mar 10, 2009 22:10:27 GMT
Well as i have never felt the need to use the modern casting styles..ie,snap T's or snake rolls,though i do mess about with the latter of the two from time to time...i simply get by using the traditional single/double spey,i don't suppose I'm in a real position to answer that one...i also do not have a shooting head,
which i believe works with this type of cast...maybe that question should be put to someone who uses them more often than i ?
I thought you had a lesson with such a person not that long ago ?
Did you not ask him?
Ive always got by using the traditional method which has accounted for plenty of fish..why change?
|
|
conwyrod
Advisory Board
Autumn on the Conwy
Posts: 4,659
|
Post by conwyrod on Mar 10, 2009 22:16:08 GMT
|
|
fenton
Active Member
Posts: 246
|
Post by fenton on Mar 11, 2009 9:37:41 GMT
Well as i have never felt the need to use the modern casting styles..ie,snap T's or snake rolls,though i do mess about with the latter of the two from time to time...i simply get by using the traditional single/double spey,i don't suppose I'm in a real position to answer that one...i also do not have a shooting head, which i believe works with this type of cast...maybe that question should be put to someone who uses them more often than i ? I thought you had a lesson with such a person not that long ago ? Did you not ask him? Ive always got by using the traditional method which has accounted for plenty of fish..why change? Hi, I asked the question following a post SK made in another thread before he went away to foreign climes, and was interested in a fisher's perception  I make no claims as to the proficiency of my casting, or my knowledge relating to it. To be honest, considering the length of time I have been fishing, and the amount of time I spend in the river, my casting is pretty disgraceful. I look on the snake roll and snap T as different types of cast to the single or double spey, and wouldn't immediately classify them as spey casts. Having watched the two older chaps who introduced me to salmon fishing, I consider that their casting styles were different to those executed by more modern fishers. These guys were using older rods, and usually a Wet Cell 2, and my perception is that the whole action appeared slower, with less emphasis placed on loading the rod on the 'backcast' than more modern styles. With the advent of more modern lighter faster rods, and heavily tapered spey lines, I wondered what differences this engenders in casting styles, specifically with respect to single and double spey casts. Thanks foir the feedback, Cheers Fenton |
|
|
|
Post by salmonking on Mar 11, 2009 12:19:13 GMT
Well if a snap t or a snake roll is not a modern speycast...i haven't got a bloody clue..so why ask me?
You on a f@kin wind up?
|
|
tweedsider
Active Member
Quietness is best
Posts: 993
|
Post by tweedsider on Mar 19, 2009 14:36:23 GMT
Last season I gave my Shakespear 15ft GLASS FIBRE rod an expermental half hour with a brass tube. That was long enough the bloody thing weighed a ton, carbon is the thing or one of the other modern materials, if only the blank makers would use a little more of it. Reels well you cant beat the old clickity clack in my opinion which is not a humble one.
Tweedsider
|
|
