Which style of Angling

  • Thread starter Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)
  • Start date
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
We have debated this subject some years ago,yet I think it would be worthy of a second go since we have increased readership and a lot of new contributors.

I'll start the ball rolling by detailing what I believe to be the first 3 forms of angling requiring the most skill.

1: Fly fishing on still water using a floating line and a sinking fly or nymph. The reason it is the most skillfulis first of all excellent casting ability is required. Secondly, you have to judge accurately how deep the fish are feeding. Thirdly the rerieve, or lack ofit has to be executed to a nicety! Remember you are fishing in 3 dimensions too.

2: Trotting a float on a river. The technique of runningfloat tackle, especially with a centrepin reel takes a great deal of skill as does hitting the bite.

3: Lure fishing using a baitcasting reel. Once the technique of castingthese reels is acquired, then comeslearning the skills of accurate casting, working the lure and the importance of depth.

I will say in addition that all three methods listed require angling in three dimensions.

One of the reasons that I put fly fishing in number one spot is that it is the only form of angling where you might require the help of a professional tutor.

But what do you think?
 
Peter Jacobs

Peter Jacobs

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Messages
31,030
Reaction score
12,200
Location
In God's County: Wiltshire
"all three methods listed require angling in three dimensions"

Depending on how you define the 3rd dimension, depth, then I'd still opt for:

Casting a Dry Fly, upstream to a rising Trout.

Not only do you need experience and watercraft, but also the same casting skills and a good knowledge of entymology.
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
I totally disagree there Peter. Dry fly fishing isdone in two dimensions without the addition of depth.

I think it was both Halford and Skues that thought the same. Certainly **** Walker did and after doing lots snd lots of fly fishing I tend to agree.

However that doesn't mean to say that upstream dry fly fishing is without its skills, including the mending of the line to bring the fly in line with the trout without drag. The trouble with dry fly fishing on streams is that these days I get little in the way of opportunities to do it,now beinga pensioner.
 
Peter Jacobs

Peter Jacobs

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Messages
31,030
Reaction score
12,200
Location
In God's County: Wiltshire
Ron,

A Dry Fly never sits totally on the surface, hence my comment regarding 'how you define the 3rd dimension'


Cakey,

Oi, part-time fluff chucker in my case if you don't mind . . .
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
Come on Peter let's not split hairs.

Whether the fly sits wholly on the surface film or partially, we are still talking about things that appear on the surface. Some flies are often taken when they sink, others will hang there drowned and neverget taken.

For example I can't ever remember a trout taking a drowned hawthorn fly of mine and I have taken hundreds of trout on floating hawthorn imitations. Trout expect them on the surface.

However I have caught many trout on drowned sedge flies.
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
By the way, method 1 does not include the use of the bung or sight bob. If you know how to work a nymph properly, you don't need the help of a sight bob.

And I often wonder if Czech nymphing can really be described as fly fishing!
 
Peter Jacobs

Peter Jacobs

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 21, 2001
Messages
31,030
Reaction score
12,200
Location
In God's County: Wiltshire
The only reason I raised the point Ron was to highlight that the '3 dimensions' is not really that important when discussing which style of angling requires the most manipulative skill.

As to your number 3, I think it takes more manipulative skills to fish a waggler across a river in a strong wind than it does to cast lures, but then that is what makes our sport so unique - different things to different folk.
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
Fish a waggler across a river in a strong wind??

Never had much trouble doing it myself. However dropping a lure to within 6 inches of a target at 25 yards takes an inordinate amount of skill. The most accurate casters of lures I have ever seen are the late Barry Welham and our own Derek Gibson.

Top American bass anglers such as Rick Clunn would also astound you with their accuracy.
 
C

Cakey

Guest
I can cast a two ounce lead with in inches of where I want it
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
Ja but you don't have to work it after you have cast it do you?

And a lead is one thing, but lures with their different shapes, weights and wind resistance are a totally different thing.
 
R

Ron 'The Hat' Clay (ACA)

Guest
Yes.

However throughout angling history, man has attempted to make things easier for the angler. For example the fixed spool reel and elasticated pole in coarse fishing, the bung in fly fishing, the bolt rig and hair rig in carp fishing.

But some of these expedients are not particularly pretty if you ask me.

For example there seems nothing worse to my eyes thanseeing a group of anglers with the wind at their backs fishing sight bobs and bungs like demented gnomes whithout even having the need to cast.
 
Derek Gibson

Derek Gibson

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
3,669
Reaction score
5
Location
shefield, south yorkshire
And that's exactly how I was taught Graham.

My grandfather was a hard taskmaster, at the age of eleven he would supervise my casting using an old Nottingham reel. First from loops drawn down from between the rod rings for hour after hour. When he was satisfied with my progress, I was allowed to use his Arielreel for that most difficult of techniques '' casting from the reel''. Oh I can here him now ''No not like that boy use feel and tempo''.

Some years later he passed on but not before asking me, ''well lad was all that practise and scolding worth it '', ''absolutely, thanks Grandad''. I still hang on to my old speedia Graham.
 
S

Sean Meeghan

Guest
I'd say:

Upstream nymphing on a river. You you've got the casting, but then the complication of the retrieve to keep in touch with the fly, followed by detecting the take.

Still water nymphing The technique of the retrieve is still not understood by the vast majority of fly anglers

Lure fishing with a multipier narrowly beats trotting. The mechanics of accurate casting soon become second nature, but a serious amount of though needs to go into lure selection and the retrieve. As soon as you stop thinking you stop catching

Using Ron's original logic would put fly fishing with a sight bob on a par with stick float fishing. You've got the mechanics of the cast and after that it's float fishing with all the problems of finding the correct depth, mending the line, controlling the bait. Or am I missing something .....
 
Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC)

Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC)

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2007
Messages
13,768
Reaction score
40
Location
Cheshire
Cakey

and what bait to use

and how to present it

and what to feed

and how to feed it

and how to detect bites

and how/when to hit them

and get the fish in........
 
Muffin

Muffin

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
579
Reaction score
1
Location
Bath
Matt,

None of those things are 'exclusive' to carp fishing? So on that basis those statements cross accross many different forms of fishing.

What I would say is how does one define skill? I would say that learning any 'new' type of fishing that you have not done before takes much time, patience and skill. So someone who has been fishing for Carp all their life will have greater experience than someone who has just started, but that does not define who has the greater skill?

The novice angler needs to build up experience to then be classed as skillful? So are the3 forms of fshing mentioned above by Ron more dictated by experience than skill or are they the same thing, and is watercraft a skill or is it just again experience?

I know for example that I will never be a sucessful pike angler and use lures etc, as I dont have an interest in this, but it doesn't mean that I dont posess the skill.

So I reckon the most skillful form of fishing is the one that you have never done before as it takes great skill to master a new fishing technique that takes you outside your conmfort/experience zone.

Simon
 
J

John Heelis

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 10, 2008
Messages
244
Reaction score
0
I'm going to have to agree with Simon on this one.

angling is very much like athletics in some aspects. There are many differing types of fishing such as sea, coarse and fly. all three can then be divided again, depending on what discipline you are undertaking.

Therefore, as Simon mentioned, learning a new form of the fishing art will require a certain degree of skill to master.

I've had a try with lure fishing and i do agree that there is a fair amount of skill to it. my brother in law only ever lure fishes and he's a dab hand at it, but get him float fishing and he's pants. but this doesn't make him a poor fisherman, it's just not his discipline.

Getting back to the original thread.....

Chucking fluff looks impossible to me, so because i cant do it i would say it requires more skill than i have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top