Keith...Please don't flame...keep it to an admirable discussion.
I still can't agree with your first paragraph here. show me a good shock absorbing
"true" 4 wt. and I'll believe you. I also believe a heavier weight can and should be
used to catch larger fish. If not lets all use 9ft 3 wt. to go after chinook. As
long as they are good "shock absorbers" it's ok? I think you are referring to the
spine of the rod. To handle large fish you have to have heavier spine, and better hook
setting ablity, hence heavier rods. So to say the only advantage to heavier rods is
to cast farther and to help you get through the wind is not exactly true.
I'm sure we've all seen someone break a rod or two on a large fish. I know I have.
It's pretty common to see this happen on the Kalama when the Fall Coho are running.
And those are broke on 8-12lbs.
Justin
On Sat, 15 Jul 2000 23:28:51 -0700 Keith Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>A 4 wt rod for steelheading is certainly not the norm. The notion that a
>heavier weight rod is required to land a big fish quickly is nonsense. The
>truth of the matter is that the shock absorbing characteristics of a
>lighter weight rod can be a real advantage when landing big fish with
>lighter tippets. Granted, fishing with tippet that is too light for the
>situation is a mistake. The only real advantage of a heavier rod is it's
>ability to cast heavier gear longer distances and to deal with stronger
>winds.
>
>Unless you've watched Frank Amato fish under these circumstances you don't
>have enough information to be critical. To criticize someone else's choices
>without knowing all of the details is arrogant.
>
>After 30+ years of fly fishing I certainly don't need anyone to tell me what
>is the correct rod to use in any situation. I doubt Frank Amato needs your
>input either.
>
>Keith Bell
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Chuck Breed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2000 9:55 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: 6wt two hander
>
>
>Preston,
>Me thinks there's nothing "normal" about using a 4 wt.on steelhead.Though
>his
>publications are passing good, fishing with a 4 wt for steelhead is
>subnormal
>unless he's fishing for smolts. My opinion of him falls greatly.
> On the Umpqua I was gently chided for using a 7 wt. It is held that a 9
>is
>optimum and a 8 "light" for steelhead. I was under the opinion that we
>wanted to
>catch them not kill them.Poor example Mr. Amato.
> Respectfully,
>C.P.(Preston) Breed
>
>Preston Singletary wrote:
>
>> Interesting, is that the Cabela's 11' 3" 6 wt.? I reviewed on of those
>for
>> FF&TJ and was impressed. I'm looking forward to trying it for cutthroat
>> this year. Frank Amato was pretty excited about using one for steelhead
>on
>> the Deschutes (he normally uses a 4 wt. single hander, hmmm) this fall.
>> Preston
>
>
Have you gotten your free email at fishing.com or flyfishing.com? I got mine, come
get yours! Visit www.fishing.com or www.flyfishing.com to sign up!
