Question? Dennis Darkin invented pendulum casting, !!!!!!!

[phonebush]

Regarding the original post. Poldark, did you mean "rod". I am a confused Yank??? The answer to the difference won't help my condition but may straighten me out on what you are talking about. Is there any other way to "present" a pole except to swing it in a pendulum fashion?

Phone

[Leon Roskilly]

phonebush:

Regarding the original post. Poldark, did you mean "rod". I am a confused Yank??? The answer to the difference won't help my condition but may straighten me out on what you are talking about. Is there any other way to "present" a pole except to swing it in a pendulum fashion?

Phone

Phone,

 

Over here, a rod has eyes for the line to pass through and is used with a reel.

 

A pole has no eyes, and the line is attached directly to the tip (or actually to a length of elastic which emerges from the tip).

 

A rod is used for casting long distances and for battling with powerful fish. Delicate bait presentation, in exactly the right spot is a problem, especially if the wind is blowing your line about..

 

A pole (which can be in excess of 15metres long and cost several thousand pounds) is used to lower and hold the bait in a static position at distance. The elastic is used to play the fish and the fish is bought shorewards, by unshipping sections of the pole. Great for fishing matches on canals and stillwaters for smallish fish, but a bit of a problem when a 30lber takes your bait!!

 

Tight Lines - leon

[phonebush]

Leon,

Yes, I have had that explained to me before and have tried to correct my expression of one from the other. Thanks for clairifying again for me.

 

Notice in the first post Phil Dean's reference is to a "pole" but subsequent posts talk about a "rod"???

 

Is there any way you could present a "pole" other than a "pendulum" cast? In the UK do you refer to a "pole" being "cast"??

 

Did everyone except me know he was talking about a "rod" because he mentions the specifics of a pendulum cast?

 

Phone

[Peter Sharpe]

If I disappear up into my loft and dig around for a few days, I may still have that very article from Angling magazine. I remember being very confused by the instruction to put all your effort into the cast at the point where the lead is actually swinging in towards you. This seemed to go against all natural instincts, but I remember watching people who had got the hang of it.

 

The more psychotic practitioners would start the cast off with their back to the waves, with the rod angled to their right at shoulder height, with the tip angled down slightly towards the beach. The lead would gradually be swung to and fro, as they waited for that perfect Zen moment.

 

At the very cusp of orgasm, the rod would be whipped viciously sideways, parallel to the beach, then as the body twisted round, the arc would gradually climb towards the vertical, until with a grunting, orgiastic climax, the lead would be hurled out of sight. Unfortunately, out of sight often meant buried deep into the skull of someone several hundred yards sideways along the beach, as the inevitable crack off occurred.

 

They used ABU 464's, which would probably horrify many modern day anglers, as they were as stiff as pokers, and very heavy. In fact they must have been nearly as fearsome as some of the rods many anglers seem to think are necessary for modern carp fishing.

[poledark]

Phonebush, to try to enlighten you further, (or even confuse you more )Yes you would use a form of pendulum swing to "cast" your bait when using a pole, indeed a very effective method is to use 6 or 7 meters of pole with the same length of line attached and the bait is swung out pendulum style and when a ,usually small, fish is caught it is swung in "to hand"

 

As Vagabond has described there are various styles of beachcasting, these vary from laying the lead weight (LW) on the ground behind you and then basically giving it an almighty thump, the faster you do it the further it goes. I saw Terry Carroll do the first 200yd cast in a tournament, but due to the public treading all over the place his marker peg got "lost". This style did tend to favour big strong men.

 

Les Moncrieff developed his layback which did not allow the LW to touch the ground and was ideally suited to beach casting, again, as Vagabond has pointed out, it tended to suit big men.The LW hung about 2feet below the rod tip and was swung gently away from you before commencing the cast.

 

Both of these styles were started facing to about 4pm on the dial, assuming the cast being made to 12 noon.

 

The pendulum cast was at first declared illegal by the BCA and was a major factor in the founding of the UKSF, another was their insinstence on "level line" which was totally impractical for read fishing. I was the first Treasurer of the UKSF.

 

The full pendulum cast is made with the angler facing about 9pm with the rod held almost vertical, a drop of about 8ft to the LW. the LW is swung away from you towards9pm and with a gentle amount of encouragement is helped back so that it climbs to a point level with the rod tip and with the LW reaching about 1am.

At the instant that the LW stops swinging and becomes "weightless" the cast is made with all possible speed, the LW performing an arc through more than 360 deg.

This allows great speed to be developed and the rod is compressed FULLY whilst still building up tip speed WITHUOT ANY REAL PHYSICAL EFFORT.

I am well out of date with the casting scene, my last beachcasting was many years ago with glass fibre rods, what we would have done with carbon fibre I can only imagine.

 

One of my proudest moments came when a chap I had coached, his name was Martin Calvert, went to South Africa and returned with a Silver Medal in the World Casting Championships, no mean feat at the time.

 

Various letters were published by various experts at the time, various books were written and some very wild claims were made but as I said earlier as far as I, and most others who were around at the time, were aware I did, along with George Brown, develop the pendulum cast into the style that is still in use today.

 

Den

 

[ 30 March 2002, 08:24 PM: Message edited by: poledark ]

[phonebush]

You guy are great!

Phone

[Peter Sharpe]

I prefer my version Poledark. Who are you to say anyway?

Are you trying to tell me that I misunderstood it right from the beginning? Whenever I watched people casting in this style, they would always wait until the lead had swung in towards them before giving it the big heave-ho. I suppose this combined whip-lash momentum with the force of the fully compressed rod, to achieve quite awesome power. As I said before though, it was downright dangerous unless sensible precautions were taken.

 

[ 31 March 2002, 08:53 PM: Message edited by: Peter Sharpe ]

[poledark]

Peter, I don't know what article you are referring to but mine tells you to start with the LW at the top of the swing TOWARDS you.

This was in fact one of the major refinements.

 

If in fact it was my article (one of many) that you are referring to then perhaps you should reread it, and also the instructions given in the previous post.

 

Vagabond, It's been so long since I did any serious casting that I am not sure that I could be of much use, but you never know.

Not having seen you cast, but going by your words as to the distance you achieved(130yds) then you are only one small step away from the breakthrough to 160+.

I used to teach dozens of anglers to cast in excess of 150 yds, many on their first or second attempt. To see the looks on their faces was very satisfying ( I never charged anyone a penny piece)

 

You mention using thr reel at the butt end of the rod, did you know that I designed and patented a moveable reel fitting that enabled you to use the reel in any position you liked for casting, and then shift it to the most comfortable position for retrieving?

 

It was incorporated in the design of a rod made by one of the leading rod makers of the time, but unfortunately they failed to liase with me and made the fittings the wrong way around!

 

Yes if it wasn't so pathetic it would have been funny, on top of this, this company tried to conceal the fact that they had started production and I subsequentially had to sue (successfully) for my tiny royalties.

 

There ended my flirtation with the commercial side of angling, and all subsequent ideas were given freely to anyone who cared to listen or read.

 

Den

[Peter Sharpe]

Thanks for clearing that up. I would have hated to think I'd got it wrong all those years. I'd never even been sea fishing at the time, I was just fascinated by all the regular arguments in the magazines. I also remember someone putting forward a very feasible argument for having a series of small rings alond the rod, instead of the more common coil breakers, as seen on some of the more ludicrous carp rods. The theory was that there would be less line slap within the smaller rings, and therefore less friction.

[phil dean]

glad I mentioned this, the article was in a copy of sea angler about 3 or 4 weeks ago, it was talking about distance casting and mentioned poledark.

 

I've only known poledark through this site and then only as a course angler and in particlular a pole angler (meaning a pole as in the take apart carbon type and not a bamboo cane)being an area he often comments on, and never realised he had also invented the most popular of beach casting methods.

 

My comment was really a joke (of poor quality), beach casting lending itself to sending leads hundreds of yards, whereas pole fishing tends to limit the angler to a distance the length of his pole.

 

I found it amusing that a man so skilled in the closer range art of pole fishing was the same man that had taken beach casting to previousley unbelievable distances.

 

as I say, glad I asked, this has really been very interesting for me.

 

ttfn

phil