Through Action Rod ?

[rob48]

Chris, from this conversation so far I can only conclude that yourself and rob48 are better at trotting than me, I do admire you both if you can practice what you preach.
I don't consider myself to have weak wrists, but there is no way I can flick my wrist and be sure to set a hook at 70 to a 100yds, I just can't do it. I mean, even the stretch in the line and bend in the rod has to be accounted for at those kind'a ranges.
I'd love to witness your skills being applied...really I would, maybe you could teach me something new, which would be great for me .
Possibly all three of us could meet up after all this commotion and I can be a pupil?
I read this post through and it does sound a little sarcastic, but it isn't meant to be, so don't take it the wrong way.

I couldn't comment on 70 yards+ Tigger, I don't fish venues where that length of trott is required, or at least I don't think I do!
One thing that may have an effect is that I think, from what you've written previously, that I fish with thinner/weaker lines than you use. Maybe that could make a difference?

 

[Keith M]

For float fishing I look for a rod with a fairly crisp tip action which is capable of picking the line off of the surface easily on the strike (especially at medium to longer ranges) as long as there is enough forgiveness in the tip to prevent fine hooklengths from parting or hooks pulling out. The middle and butt sections should also be such that they can come into play during the fight without bottoming out so should not be too stiff or heavy.

I remember reading the following back in the fibreglass rods era in one of my Carp fishing books and tried it myself and found it was true then, and I’m sure that it still holds water with more modern rods today:

Try placing a 2oz lead at 100 mtrs in a field and using a fast taper Carp rod and 10lb mono line strike as hard and fast as you can, and you would be lucky if your lead moved more than a foot at most; however if you struck using a slow long and powerful sweep your lead would move a lot more on the strike (but probably still not as far as you thought it would).
Then do exactly the same with a softer actioned rod and you would be lucky if the lead even moved at all; however hard you struck.

At closer ranges I find It’s usually a lot better to use a slightly softer more through actioned rod (unless there are some close in dangerous obstacles that need to be avoided or I’m using ‘stop & hold’ tactics to stop a fish from running into a snag on the strike).
But generally I much prefer my rod to have a more forgiving action in the middle and tip sections when I’m after heavier fish at closer ranges.

When Im trying to net a heavy fish right under my rod tip I tend to slacken off my anti reverse anyway incase the fish decides to zoom off when it sees the net and I use my finger to apply pressure whenever it’s needed.

 

[sam vimes]

Chris, from this conversation so far I can only conclude that yourself and rob48 are better at trotting than me, I do admire you both if you can practice what you preach.
I don't consider myself to have weak wrists, but there is no way I can flick my wrist and be sure to set a hook at 70 to a 100yds, I just can't do it. I mean, even the stretch in the line and bend in the rod has to be accounted for at those kind'a ranges.
I'd love to witness your skills being applied...really I would, maybe you could teach me something new, which would be great for me .
Possibly all three of us could meet up after all this commotion and I can be a pupil?
I read this post through and it does sound a little sarcastic, but it isn't meant to be, so don't take it the wrong way.

Don't be soft. I never mentioned specific ranges and certainly nothing as extreme as 100 yards. Frankly, if I ever wanted to fish 100 yards distant, I'd move. Whilst I routinely trot further than the twenty yards or so, that many believe to be long range, I doubt I've ever exceeded 70 yards or so. There's not a cat in hell's chance of conditions being benign enough to see even the biggest float at that kind of range every time out. 50 yards is quite feasible, but light conditions can still impinge on that. Whilst I'll increase the force of a strike with greater range, I won't resort to a full blown sweep strike. If that becomes necessary, I'm either fishing too far, or using an inappropriate rod.

 

[trotter2]

As Keith just pointed out and it still holds water the old match anglers carried two rods each fit for a different purpose. Spliced tip for short line fishing and a waggler rod for distance work. The modern more versatile rod covering more eventuallities is the progressive action rod.

 

[tigger]

Don't be soft. I never mentioned specific ranges and certainly nothing as extreme as 100 yards. Frankly, if I ever wanted to fish 100 yards distant, I'd move. Whilst I routinely trot further than the twenty yards or so, that many believe to be long range, I doubt I've ever exceeded 70 yards or so. There's not a cat in hell's chance of conditions being benign enough to see even the biggest float at that kind of range every time out. 50 yards is quite feasible, but light conditions can still impinge on that. Whilst I'll increase the force of a strike with greater range, I won't resort to a full blown sweep strike. If that becomes necessary, I'm either fishing too far, or using an inappropriate rod.

Not being soft Chris, just amazed at the fact that a flick of the wrist will hook fish at any kind'a range, even way less than 70yds. Another thing to take into consideration is even at relatively close ranges is if fishing overdepth, the more line laying on the deck or the larger the bow from float to weights and hook the harder you need to strike and you have to make a large sweeping strike to take up the slack. Same applies to deeper swims.
As I said, I wasn't being sarcastic, just impressed that you and rob48 can hook fish with a flick of the wrist, I can't do it unless fishing at lesser distances.

 

[rob48]

Not being soft Chris, just amazed at the fact that a flick of the wrist will hook fish at any kind'a range, even way less than 70yds. Another thing to take into consideration is even at relatively close ranges is if fishing overdepth, the more line laying on the deck or the larger the bow from float to weights and hook the harder you need to strike and you have to make a large sweeping strike to take up the slack. Same applies to deeper swims.
As I said, I wasn't being sarcastic, just impressed that you and rob48 can hook fish with a flick of the wrist, I can't do it unless fishing at lesser distances.

Did you see my earlier post about line dia/strength Tigger?
I will add that if I'm not connecting with bites it's not the striking action so much as presentation that causes the problem. I usually find that shuffling the shot, and sometimes depth, about until the fish take confidently is the main issue.

 

[tigger]

As Keith just pointed out and it still holds water the old match anglers carried two rods each fit for a different purpose. Spliced tip for short line fishing and a waggler rod for distance work. The modern more versatile rod covering more eventuallities is the progressive action rod.

That does sound sensible, but I don't think the sphere spliced rod is necessarily a short line rod. I was hitting fish at 70 yards with my 13 6 model. It just felt as though the softer tip was taking the bant out of my strikes, but I may well be wrong. I'll test it out as soon as poss. I know the 15 6 felt like a different animal and even though I was only trotting fifty yards when using it, I would be confident to use it at longer ranges.

 

[tigger]

Did you see my earlier post about line dia/strength Tigger?
I will add that if I'm not connecting with bites it's not the striking action so much as presentation that causes the problem. I usually find that shuffling the shot, and sometimes depth, about until the fish take confidently is the main issue.

Rob, I wouldn't go below 4lb mainline for any kind of long trotting. On my regualr venues I prefer to fish 4 or 6lb (mostly 6lb) straight through. I usually target chub and barbel but catch just as many dace with that set up as I do if I set up a lighter one. If actually targetting/trotting for dace I don't have to anything like trott as far.

 

[rob48]

The heaviest line I use is 3.4lb for the bolo, 2.0 or 2.5lb for the stick, perhaps being lighter/thinner it's slightly more responsive? I'll admit that I do set my stall for roach and any large chub or barbel are a bonus.

 

[trotter2]

Not being soft Chris, just amazed at the fact that a flick of the wrist will hook fish at any kind'a range, even way less than 70yds. Another thing to take into consideration is even at relatively close ranges is if fishing overdepth, the more line laying on the deck or the larger the bow from float to weights and hook the harder you need to strike and you have to make a large sweeping strike to take up the slack. Same applies to deeper swims.
As I said, I wasn't being sarcastic, just impressed that you and rob48 can hook fish with a flick of the wrist, I can't do it unless fishing at lesser distances.

Yes Ian I agree the longer rod will definitely be more effective at line pick up stands to reason. I would hope the browning has overcome a lot of the problems asociated with the early spliced tip rods, things move on.

 

[tigger]

Yes Ian I agree the longer rod will definitely be more effective at line pick up stands to reason. I would hope the browning has overcome a lot of the problems asociated with the early spliced tip rods, things move on.

My older daiwa amorphous spliced rod was fine appart from the reel holder which would strip paint from the reels foot, so I sold it.