Seriously, I thought the oval blank thing was a bit odd, well, that was before I handled one of the float rods...superb tool!
I know the tri-drag will not be a gimmick simply because its shimano and they do not do gimmicks...before you sceptics wade in I would like to say that after using shimano for 35 years (bike bits, and fishing tackle) I have never known them to make something that is not proven to work. some years ago they bought out an oval chain ring set (cycling) and other manufactures laughed at them, but it really worked, and yes, I had a bike with one fitted it was a reel boon!
Neither the the two top companies: Shimano and Daiwa have a habit of doing gimmicks, although I didn't think much of Daiwa's idea of having the line going through the centre of the rod.
As regards the oval blank and preferred plane of bending concept. Well we have that already in the form of the "spine" on any tubular rod that utilises the wrapping of a cloth around a tapering mandril.
Most of my rods have the rod rings whipped on in line with the spine, that means that the rod bends on the stiffest plane. I have often wondered if this is right. Shouldn't the rod rings be placed where the bend of the rod takes the preferred line? Would that help casting distance and accuracy?
One thing I will say about the spine on a fishing rod blank is that it affects the "test curve" of the rod tremendously, by up to 15% in some cases, just by changing the plane of bending by 90 degrees.
This is why I get very annoyed with companies that claim silly figures like 1lb 14oz or 1lb 2oz for test curves. Sorry but such figures do not exist!
If there is a gimmick in fishing tackle, this is it.
