Washington Fly Fishing Forum banner

Up one line? Two?

20K views 230 replies 26 participants last post by  Richard E 
#1 ·
I've decided from the excellent input in another thread to get a Rio Outbound type III sink. I'll be putting the line on an Echo Classic 10' 6wt. Its a moderate fast action rod. I know many people here are upping their line weights one or two sizes with lines similar to the Outbound. Due to various circumstances (timing etc), I may not be able to try different lines on the rod before buying my new line. If this is the case, I'd like to have as much information as possible when picking what line size. So I'm opening up a new thread hoping for as much input as possible.

Who out there is upping their line weights on integrated shooting heads? What is your set up?

Those who are using standard shooting heads, if you know the head weight (or close to it) shout it out so I can compare.

Thanks all for the input. Hopefully I can go see Leland or Les and get their help and wont need this thread, but it sure can't hurt.
 
#2 ·
I asked the same question about the OB when I bought it and was told by the 2 guys at the shop that the OB is already oversized so just use the same wt. as your rod. I don't know if this was sound advice but it is what I was told and I like the line so far.

Also, there is a good thread on the OB and how casting it is different relative to other lines...the advice there has been really helpful. I'll dig around and see if I can find it. The running line is problematic but if you manage it adequately you can really shoot it out. What ever you do, don't give up on it.

Edit: Found it...the tip about letting a little line slip thru on the final false cast added 15 feet to my casts:
http://www.washingtonflyfishing.com/board/showthread.php?t=41512&highlight=Rio+Outbound
 
#3 ·
SciGuy

Just goes to show that you can hear anything at the fly shops.

Jrlyman

If you are going for the type three Outbound, then you definitely want to overline that six weight at least twice. The Outbound 8 weight might be perfect.

I can't recommend Les Johnson for more advice on this matter. If I were you I would shop online where the astute researcher can find good deals.

Steve
 
#4 ·
SciGuy

If you are going for the type three Outbound, then you definitely want to overline that six weight at least twice. The Outbound 8 weight might be perfect.

Steve
I'm not sure where this advice comes from, but the fly shop info was correct - the line is already over weight. In fact if you get the whole head (45ft) out of the tip before you shoot you are seriously over-lining the rod already (measured for a standard 30ft line wt). While I have not used the type III, I have the outbound floater and intermediated in 6wt for my 6wt rod and they work fine.
 
#6 ·
Yes the heads are 37.5', and they are already overweight. But I'd heard of people overlining (new word) beyond that. The Rio guy e-mailed me back saying such. I'm still considering a 7wt line, but it looks like 6 wt will likely be the way to go. SciGuy, great tip on that thread. I did a bunch of searching around, but didn't come across this one some how.

Thanks all.
 
#8 ·
I'd tend to agree with Stonefish, particularly for the 10' Echo stick. It will be a little more challenging to load than a 9' stic.

Stonefish recently purchased an Airflo 40+ fast intermediate line in a 7 weight for his Redington CPS 9'6" six weight, and has been absolutely ecstatic over the combo. He swore that it added 10' to 15' to his cast, and knowing Stonefish and that he typically under-exaggerates, that meant a lot. We hit the beach yesterday, and he was absolutely laying out some casts that anyone would be proud of; heck, 10 to 15'? It was more like 20' to his casts, with fewer false casts!

I also agree with Stonefish that you should really, really, really consider the intermediate head for beach fishing. I'm betting if you took a poll of experienced fly fishers who use this or similar lines (say the equally outstanding Airflo 40+ or the SA Streamer Express) that the intermediate head would be the preferred set up for beach fishing. As noted earlier, I fished with Stonefish and several experienced beach fly fishers yesterday. there were 5 of us, all using 6 weights, and a person relatively new to beach fishing using a 7 weight. Here are the lines used on the 6 weights: WF7 Airflo 40+ intermediate; WF6 Clear camo (standard WF line); WF6 Outbound intermediate (he wishes he had instead purchasd the WF7); Mastery Bonefish WF6F (he said because the line had available; he usually fishes a clear camo); and a Rio Striper WF7 multi-tiip with clear tip.
 
#10 ·
Well I think that perhaps an intermediate line, while the most versatile, would sink too slow to make fishing more than a couple feet deep very difficult. At 1.5 ips sink, it would take about 24 seconds to sink to 3 feet. That seems to defeat the purpose of the shooting head design, minimal time wasted false casting and maximum distance. I feel that something sinking more around 3.5 ips would still be effective at fishing the surface, while allowing me to fish deeply with less time wasted.

But I will fully admit that I have zero experience with lines other than wf floating. So perhaps I'm misunderstanding these sink rates. In my understanding, if I cast out a fast intermediate line sinking at 1.5 (ish) ips, with say an 8 foot leader and a slow sinking fly such as a clouser tied with bead chain eyes, it would probably take about 20 seconds to let the FLY (not the line) sink to around 5-6 feet. Is this roughly correct? Call me inpatient but that seems too long to me.

Also, would I be incorrect in assuming that with a type III line I could simply begin stripping at a moderate rate right off the bat, and keep my fly within a foot or two of the surface? (this is assuming I'm using something lightly weighted or no weight.

I likely could be very mistaken about the real world depths these lines would be reaching. I think that in beach fishing for coho it is beneficial to be able to fish depths of 4-8 feet, or even deeper sometimes. Am I mistaken here also?

All your help is appreciated, I hope I do not come off as arguing with you guys, I'm simply explaining my reasoning.

Oh ya, and though I'm trying to make up my mind on SOMETHING, haha, I can't help but be drawn to the airflo because of the shorter head, and easier running line, and longer length (not that I can cast120', but its nice to know I could...:rofl:)
 
#12 ·
Oh ya, and though I'm trying to make up my mind on SOMETHING, haha, I can't help but be drawn to the airflo because of the shorter head, and easier running line, and longer length (not that I can cast120', but its nice to know I could...:rofl:)
Oh and in another post, I made comment on these long head lines, and I do consider the airflo long. It's obviously just my opinion as these lines are selling like hotcakes, but here's what I have to say about that...

Well, we should have one voice against the outbound I don't like them for the sound. I do like them, but not for the sound. With a steep beach behind, and a long leader for surface work you're talking ALOT of line in the air behind you that you need to keep up to not break a hook. I've pretty much converted to 26 to 28 foot heads (primarily clear intermediate with a 6 to 9 foot leader depending on the weight of the fly. 10 to 12 foot leader for poppers on a floater) for all my sound work. One quick roll, pick it up, one backcast, shoot it out. We're not talking dries to rising trout and delicate presentations. If you're making more than 2 backcasts you're wasting your time and every backcast increases the chance to hook a hunk of rope, a tree (fish the narrows at high tide much?), break a hook, etc. when you're throwing 48 to 52 feet (including a long leader for surface work) behind you. Honestly answer the question "how many backcasts am I making before each delivery?" If the answer is more than 2, a longer line will only worsen the situation. I see guys doing 4 to 5 backcasts all the time. Sometimes more.
 
#11 ·
I blame Randall Kaufmann... In his "Lake Fly Fishing" book, he said that intermediate lines stop sinking when you retrieve them staying at the same level. Just ain't so, but it's been repeated since then as gospel. With no countdown, my intermediates are 2 to 3 feet deep at the end of the retrieve, and my weighted flies are deeper than that.

A type 3 will be draggin' ass and corallin' sculpins before you reach the halfway point of your retrieve. I do cast long, and often retrieve slowly, but trust me, every SRC in the vicinity will see your fly with an intermediate line.
 
#13 ·
I do cast long, and often retrieve slowly, but trust me, every SRC in the vicinity will see your fly with an intermediate line.
How about coho? :thumb:

I jest, but I'm also serious. Are those ocean coho as willing to swim to the surface as SRC? In trout fishing, I've learned that its a very rare case when a fish would rather swim up to grab something than to reach down and grab it. But then again, snagging bottom sucks...
 
#14 ·
Yes, but we're not talking the surface, with no countdown we're talking top 2 feet, in water that often is 4 to 6 feet deep. Boaters may have a different opinion, but I'm po' white trash, and I does walkin' fishin'. The "fish swimming up" thing is kind of a myth in my experience in saltwater and stillwater. I've snorkled in salt and fresh watching fish take naturals and artificials. "Swimming up" doesn't come into play as a problem unless fish are working a tight circular pattern working some kind of suspended prey, like a tight bait ball below the surface, and even then they won't all be working the same depth. If fish are cruising and they spot something in the distance in stillwater or saltwater, they aren't nailed down to a particular depth as they might be in a river where they are bucking a current to remain relatively stationary. To a cruising fish, forward, up, down, doesn't really matter unless you are talking thermoclines, extreme currents, or something like algae where there is a dissinsentive to change depth. There are of course exceptions when a school who isn't particularly on the feed is cruising breaks or contours, but "knocking them on the nose" won't necessarily break one out of formation either then. But the only difference in my techniques between src and salmon, pink or coho is counting down. I rarely find the need to do so with SRC. With salmon I almost always do varying constantly trying to find that sweet spot.

Once again this is my experience. Your's may be different. And I'm sure boaters up here find alot of uses for quicker sinking lines. I always have in boat fishing.
 
#15 ·
Thanks so much for the detailed response, as I'm buying this set up specifically for coho, it looks like I'll be counting down also. For SRC, I have a 5wt set up. I guess (and again corrections to my guesses are welcome) what it comes down to is am I willing to snag bottom a few times in shallow water, to be able to get down deep quicker in the deep stuff... decisions decisions...
 
#16 ·
Have you searched for "coho line"? I'm sure there are threads aplenty. And I'm sure, especially with beach guys you'll find intermediate rules. And if there isn't a good thread already, why not start one. After all this is a line matching thread right here. Not a coho line thread:p
 
#18 ·
Philster,

If you were following Jrlyman's previous thread you would see that I know exactly how much weight that would put on his six weight, and hopefully break the ...!

By the way Philster, your comments on the disadvantages of the longer specialty heads are spot on, the most eloquent and articulate I have read or heard. I do not think of myself as a good catcher of fish, nevertheless, I seldom false cast unless there is fast current and I need to greatly realign and that increases the time the fly is in the water. It has been a long time since I've used heads of less than thirty feet. I seem to remember that some of the heavy stuff that required lengths of less than twenty feet were a bitch. For the last while I have simply used the taylor mades of thirty feet. So, how do the 26 and 28 feet lines work? For instance, a 26 foot floating head. Please say more about that.

My sense is that selling an outbound to a beginner is tatamount to giving a twelve guage to a 12 year old. But, you know, Jrlyman's curiosity is his greatest virtue and it may serve him for years. If I can get this casting down I may start to catch fish.

steve
 
#22 ·
Philster,

If you were following Jrlyman's previous thread you would see that I know exactly how much weight that would put on his six weight, and hopefully break the ...!

By the way Philster, your comments on the disadvantages of the longer specialty heads are spot on, the most eloquent and articulate I have read or heard. I do not think of myself as a good catcher of fish, nevertheless, I seldom false cast unless there is fast current and I need to greatly realign and that increases the time the fly is in the water. It has been a long time since I've used heads of less than thirty feet. I seem to remember that some of the heavy stuff that required lengths of less than twenty feet were a bitch. For the last while I have simply used the taylor mades of thirty feet. So, how do the 26 and 28 feet lines work? For instance, a 26 foot floating head. Please say more about that.

My sense is that selling an outbound to a beginner is tatamount to giving a twelve guage to a 12 year old. But, you know, Jrlyman's curiosity is his greatest virtue and it may serve him for years. If I can get this casting down I may start to catch fish.

steve
I am confused... So your anti-Les comments were sarcasm? If I recognized that I wouldn't have been so short. I didn't follow the other thread, but his curiosity seems to be well balanced with open mindedness and a positive attitude, but maybe that's only in this thread?:p. If you are saying you think the 6 wt is too light for coho I agree. But sometimes economics come into it, and one has to use the heaviest rod one has. I wouldn't condemn someone for that and wish broken gear on them, but I would urge them to to step up at the first opportunity.

As to the outbound being a bad choice for a beginer, I would disagree in terms of weight, but agree in terms of length. I've taught hundreds to cast and I think that a shooting head type line (overweighting by 2 or 3 aftma weights depending on the rod) is one of the best things to put in the hands of a beginner to get them to understand the concept of loading a rod. I often start out the most hardheaded folks who won't stop that speedy jerky falsecasting with a head stretched out on the grass in front of them, and make them do one sidearm back cast, wait to feel the load, and then a good forward cast and release. I've cured many "Artistic" casters that way when they see that forward cast carry 70 feet or more when they couldn't cast 40 before that.

As to line length I find that the denser the line the shorter I can get away with. I lean towards 27-28 feet with floaters and intermediates, and down to 25 to 26 feet for serious sinkers. You can go shorter, as you go much under 30 feet they all start flying like bricks, but as you already discovered as you go shoter and shorter, at some point especially with the less dense lines you start losing distance. You will get more carry with a dense heavy line and a light mono running line, but it is fundamentally true that when a fly line finishes unrolling the flight is over, and I don't care if you're steve Rajeff and release that cast the millisecond that forward loop forms, that clouser is going to duck back under your line before hitting the water and you'll be stripping 8 or 10 times with absolutely NO contact with your fly! We all have to find the point of balance that works with our casting, but I'm willing to bet that if you grab a 30 foot head that is one size heavier than you normally use, and chop 2 to 3 feet off it, unless you pride yourself on the artisitic aspect of your casting, you won't be sacrificing much. I grew up in the SF Bay Area, and this old stuff down on the coastal rivers like the Gualala, Navarro, and the Russian.

See this is why I don't watch shows like lost where there's a developing story. I'm not going to catch every episode, and I have no idea what's going on...
 
#20 ·
I'd like to defend my status as not a beginner, I'm really more of a beginning to be intermediate fly-fisher. :thumb: I'm just new to this Salty water, and new to this state. I've fished for fish in rivers and lakes from Mexico to AK on a fly rod for about 3 years, (not a long time, but I fish frequently). I've caught every (major) species of trout, in every size from 2" to 2 feet. I've worn out a pair of waders and the soles of my boots. My casting hand has had bouts with carpal tunnel, and I've nearly busted a knuckle on my left hand from a running sockeye. I've hooked myself more times than I care to mention (luckily not on a cast yet...). I definitely don't consider myself an expert. Can I say that again? I definitely am no expert. But I'd like to consider myself slightly beyond beginner, even if its only stoking my ego and fooling no one:cool:.
I know I have a lot to learn, and I can't wait.

Oh ya and I was shooting a 12 gauge at pheasants when I was 12:D...
 
#23 ·
Philster

I made no anti Les comments, quite the contrary. Les advised the man to get into shooting heads. He started a new thread and said that due to excellent advice on the previous thread he would go to the outbound route. I thought he did not heed Les's advice. Nor did he heed my advice pointing out the difficulties involved in the outbound, pissing me off! That is why I advised him to not seek Les's further advice. Had I been more clear I would have said that it is not wise to make Les surlier than he is. But that would have been too revealng of my own personality.

In the earlier thread I contrasted the advantage, disadvantage, of a heavier weight head against a lighter head, and pointed to the problems of the extra length (which I also see as the biggest problem.)

Thanks for the comments on head weight. I too have experienced the beginners amazement at shooting out eighty feet in fifteen minutes. (Disclaimer, I have taught other things, but I do not teach fly rodding.) And more importantly, thanks for the comments on head length. I count that important and will experiment with cutting it down a bit.

I also said that I appreciate Jrlymans curiosity. I should add that I appreciate his imagination
because if he can imagine it he can learn it.

Jrlyman, keep it coming.

sb
 
#24 ·
Glad you're not too bitter about me deciding on the integrated head. :thumb: I think you'll be glad to know that I have been swayed yet again towards the airflo 40+ because it is more similar to a standard shooting head its shorter than the outbound, only 30ft head. It seems like it is a good compromise between the simplicity of an all in one system, and an "old school" shooting head. It'll be an intermediate sink, because the ability to throw a popper on it occasionally (not as well as on floating I know, limited to quick retrieve/swing, whatever I'll make it work) has sold me.

Thanks for all your help, and for the record I've read Les' books, and taken a lot more of his advise than I've turned down. And I'm pretty certain a lot of it I haven't taken to heart will be stuff I'll likely learn the hard way.

As for being able to cast the shooting head, I am confident that I will be able to learn how. I am a completely self taught caster, and therefore have learned this much more slowly than many. But the first time I picked up a rod I was sending out thirty feet within five minutes, not great but functional enough to fish.

Again, thanks all, I'll keep you updated on my learning experiences.
 
#26 ·
OK...two question WRT this thread:

1) What are the advantage and disadvantages of going up a line or two? My impression from this and other threads is that with the OB you might want to go up a line if you have a slower action rod. What would it be like if you went up a line with a fast action rod? Would it cast just fine but just put excessive stress on the rod? Please explain.

2) Do most fly shops have a good return policy? For example, if I want to try going up a weight and end up not liking the line, will they usually take it back if returned within a week or so?
 
#27 ·
Typically Outbounds are between 2.5 to 3.5 sizes overweight, however fitting that weight into a longer head changes the way it interacts with the rod, so it doesn't "feel" as heavy as a 30 foot line of the same weight would feel. So an 8 weight would weigh the same as an 11 wt 30 foot shooting head (about) but the extra length slows everything down a bit and keeps it from feeling as overloaded.

I wouldn't overline with an outbound. A slower full flexing rod would require less load than a faster rod. Take a super slow and soft 6 wt. cast a 4 wt line on it. If you can cast well and control your loop, you can throw 2 inch tall v loops off that rod and it's perfect for the forks of the snoqualmie and tight quarter fishing, but you'll never get great distance out of it. Put the six back on and you got u shaped soft slow deliveries. Take a super fast 6 and do the same thing, and you'll get that same tight loop control, but for most of us alot less distance. Because you are loading the rod even less. Most of the energy going into the cast is coming from your arm motions, and little of it is being stored and "shot" from the rod. I would try a lighter Outbound on the soft rod first.

As to returns. I never took back lines that someone spooled up and used. Your relationship with your shop may be different. But at $75 a line, I doubt it.
 
#28 ·
Interesting discussion here, and I hope I'm learning something I can put to use.

I have a love/hate relationship with my 6wt Clear Intermediate Rio Outbound line. I'm tossing it with my 9' TFO Signature Series 1 6wt and it just doesn't seem right. That may be due to my lousy casting and my needing more practice refining my shooting technique, and I'm working on that. But it almost seems that the line casts more easily using a cheap backup 9' 6 wt I have that has slower action.
I found this out last week when I setup my reel with the Outbound on the ElCheapo rod for a 2nd rod while my TFO had a reel with a clear int. sinktip on it. The ElCheapo rod semed to load up better than the TFO with the Outbound line.
Then I accidentally snapped the running line when a gust of wind blew a loop of slack around my rod butt (I was fishing for searun cutts from my U-12, standing up in it in the middle of the river) just as i gave a good strip to get some more line off the reel during a backcast.:eek: Lucky thing I felt it pop and didn't shoot the line!:beathead:One cutthroat was safe from harrassment for a little while longer!
It broke about 9 feet back from where it had previously broken and I had it spliced onto the head. Now I'm going to have to remove the 9 foot section of running line, and resplice the rest of it to the head again. I won't even miss the 9 feet. :beathead:

On another subject, I'm thimkin of splicing 25 feet of T-14 onto some Amnesia for my 8 wt for fishing deep. Kind of heavy, but sounds like I don't want to go any shorter than 25' head length. Izzat about right? I already have the T-14 and Amnesia, so I might as well put 'em together.
 
#34 ·
I have a love/hate relationship with my 6wt Clear Intermediate Rio Outbound line. I'm tossing it with my 9' TFO Signature Series 1 6wt and it just doesn't seem right. That may be due to my lousy casting and my needing more practice refining my shooting technique, and I'm working on that. But it almost seems that the line casts more easily using a cheap backup 9' 6 wt I have that has slower action.
It's dangerous to comment without seeing you cast, but it's probably safe to say that a heavily loaded slow action rod is going to be very forgiving in terms of the "good" window in regards to casting timing. think of it as if there's a bell curve that measures casting timing with the ultimate cast at the center. A very narrow band in the middle of that curve is "perfect", not too early, not too late, just a little leeway to either side of perfectly loaded and timed. I know when I hit that zone because I usally say "whoa" and my cast just sails. It's not a common occurence:p the next zone is great. Just a little early or late resulting in a little less efficiency, and you still send a cast soaring with great loop formation. Then there's good, where most intermediate fishers live. You're not right on, but your casts are within 5 or 10 feet of what you would consider a really good cast, you aren't tailing or tangling your leader very often, and your loop isn't a tight V, but it's not 5 foot tall either. It's a good solid fishing cast you'd feel good about nailing all day long.

The problem is that curve is a different shape for every rod, and that fast rod's "good" window, is going to be about the size of the slow rods "great" window. Not exactly of course, but work with the analogy :rolleyes: The demands on the caster for near equal performance are going to be higher with a very fast rod. Almost everybody who isn't a great caster, especially with a shooting head style line, will do better with a more middle of the road rod. An XP is easier for most people to cast great with than a TCR even though the TCR could be considered a "better casting rod". For steelheading with long casts and swinging flies I wouldn't mind a demanding rod. If I'm standing up banging the banks with a bugger from a boat with a thousand casts for hours on end, my casting will start to suck as I get tired. I want a less demanding rod for that style of fishing.

Now some folks will just toss a heavier line on that fast rod to "open up" the good or great window. The problem is you have to be pretty knowledgeable to be able to ascertain if you are also affecting the way the rod unloads and killing the performance to the point that you might as well be using an ugly stick. It's a tough call, but with a line like an outbound, where you're already loading it up, it's usually not the answer.
 
#29 ·
Jim,
Start out with 30' and cut it back one foot at a time until you find the sweet spot for your rod. Each rod of course is different. Just my opinion, but I'd bet with T-14 the shortest you'd likely want to go with an 8 wt would be 28'.
Good luck,
Brian
 
#46 ·
Not sure I get your first question. but gms is grams. Much easier to measure than grains (though less precise obviously) for most of us as digital kitchen scales usually measure grams. A gram is about 15.5 grains. AFTMA (American Fly Tackle Manufacturers Association I believe) line weights were established for uniformity and took the place of the old letter ratings. They probably used grains because a. it was pre-metric system in the US, and b. a fly fisherman was probably an all around sportsmen, and all sportsmen would have a grain scale for reloading the shells for their shotguns:rolleyes: You can see the weights here http://www.flyfishingforum.com/expertise/knowledge/lineratings.htm
 
#45 ·
Posted by Philster:
Rio decided that it would make more sense to newbies, and I agree it does, to just sell shooting heads "for" six weights. But you still end up buying what used to be a 9 weight shooting head! Six weight WFs weigh 160. 9 weight WFs weigh 240 which is what your rio "6wt shooting head" weighs...

Good in the long run, but us old schoolers get mightily confused...
Reply With Quote
Trust me on this, sir....it ain't just the "old schoolers" that get mightily confused....:eek::confused::confused:

I'm still trying to digest your other post/reply and will probably have to ask more dumb questions...:eek:

Thanks....so far, ha!

jcnewbie:)
 
#48 ·
I'll be putting it on a 10' 6wt Echo Classic. Its got a nice medium fast action, with a good strong butt. I figure that overlining may turn out to be a good idea, lots of others do so with positive results, but it may not be necessary and who knows, maybe airflo knew what they were doing when they sized the lines and the 6wt is the right choice?:thumb:
 
#49 ·
jcnewbie, we all know I don't know squat, but if you have a shooting line it does not sound like you are shooting it. It sounds like your roll, backcast x3 or more and then launch out an extra 15' or so is the same effect of a standard WF line. I'm sure that you'll find that sweet spot that so many have eluded to, like Philster. I've watched a couple of guys wiht the shooters. Roll, back, LAUNCH a freaking butt ton of line out. They are obviously very much in tune with their setups and well versed in the process. They make it look so freaking easy. For now I'm sticking with my WF setups, but I'll dabble next in the shooting line area to see how stupid I can look.

Sounds like you will refine this process until it is perfected for you. That is very exceptional dedication, good luck.
 
#57 ·
Mumbles, I've been through this thread (and a couple of others) at least 12 times and have developed a my-grain as a result-you know, blurry vision, shakey hands, weak knees, nausea, vertigo -- you know, all the symptoms of advanced age.....:D!

Picked up a ton of potentially useful information and so now comes the tough part: Remembering it, making sense of it and then....actually putting it into practice, practice, practice :confused:!

Funny thing happened last night tho....after hours 'n hours of reading all the posts here, I decided to go to a nearby park and see if could actually employ any of the advice presented:rolleyes: !!

It was phenomenal :eek:!! 62 feet first cast with one backcast, clear to the end of the line lying on the ground at my feet. 2nd cast, stripped off more line at my feet, kept the backcast high, haul the hell out of it on the forward cast, BINGO....88 feet! :eek:! Because I am now in a state of shock, I step it off again, yep, 88 feet! 3rd cast, strip off more line onto the ground & decide to "false cast" twice before launch - Zinnggg goes the line like a rocket - until the last 10 feet of line on the ground gets snagged up on some clover buds bringing everything to a sudden halt - still it's 91 feet to the yarn on the end.
Convinced by now of my ultimate invincibility and shirt buttons near to bursting with pride and sense of accomplishment, I gear up for another "Master Class Tournament Cast", not realizing my left foot is on 30 feet or so of line at my feet. Next cast, leader & line loops tangle in the clover as I start the backcast; next cast, bobble the backcast badly = disaster; next cast only goes about 30 feet as the tangles coming off the ground slam into the stripping guide in a big wad.

Okay...., well so much for Mr. Invincibility and Master Class casting! Take a couple of deep breaths, have a smoke & contemplate my navel….finally settle down and start casting again with remarkable results! Am so confident by now I switch to my left hand (off hand) and try that for awhile with dreary results - guess I'll stick with the right hand for now!

At least now I know I CAN do it on the grass, Wednesday we'll see if I can remember anything and do it on the water….:rolleyes:

jcnewbie (...it is sooo cool when it all comes together!:D)
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top