Complicated Rigs.

[Guest Anonymous]

I'm not sure if a hooked carp that hasn't bolted off would be able to loose the hook easier on a shorter rig, I would have thought it would have been the other way around as the carp would have far less movement to shead the hook on a shorter rig, if it moved to far it would move the lead, this would give you an indication unlike the longer rig where the carp could move quite a lot without moving the lead and you never knowing about it.

The only way i see it being easier to shed the hook on a shorter rig is because the pivot point of the lead is closer although I think it would be very hard for a carp to loose a hook without the angler knowing something was going on especially using barbed hooks.

 

I agree that a longer rig could be picked up by a sucker or a picking up carp IF the rig was not visable to the carp in the first place although I do see this as a problem unless like you said earler you used a solution like superstiff

[salokcinnodrog]

I'm going to try this Long hooklength out on a couple of waters. On one there are some very cute Carp, that are extremely rig shy, in very clear water, although the biggest in the lake is only about 14lb.

The other is reliant on baits but quite cloudy. I'll try with and without the Superstiff to see what the Carp can/can't get away with on both waters.

On the longer hooklength I'm still convinced that we may get better runs as the Carp won't understand what is happening, being used to pull for resistance at say 6inches.

 

Just thinking that if it is possible to pin down loops, then Silkworm and Merlin may be good hooklengths in longer lengths, even BFA Deception which is exceptionally thin.

 

I think that the majority of Carp are hooked when they pick up the Bait, then move far enough to straighten the hooklink. Now if the Danger Radius is 6-9inches then in that 6-9inches the Carp will move with extra caution so they can stop and shake the hook out if they get pricked.

Tim Paisley wrote in To Catch A Carp when he went back to hooklinks of 45cm (15inch) he caught more bigger Carp. Another point he mentioned is that more Carp are lost on shorter hooklinks. The point is that the Carp are only lightly hooked around the edge of the lips, because the Bait is not taken far enough into the fishes mouth, due to this the hook can work out more easily during the fight.

Now this long hooklink theory starts to be borne that if the Carp are inspecting and playing with the hookbait then a long hooklength gives them more to play with and you have given them less chance of identifying the hookbait from the freebies. It also means that the bait can be taken further back into the Carp's mouth giving a better strikeable indication.

 

God this is getting too much, all this thinking. lol:confused: :D

[Guest Anonymous]

Try using the kryston "drop em" to sink the braid, it works a treat.

[Guest Anonymous]

I don't think the carp will feel much resistance from a long rig as they usually suck in debris from the bottom of the lake anyway [leaves, twigs even stones!] so i guess they could feel more confident and take the rig further back thus giving a better hook hold.

I'm not sure that using a shortish hookling means you will only hook them on the edge of the mouth [unless its very short] as the carp suck to the back of the throat to crush the bait down [i know you already know this, your not stupid!] this is only my opinion and i'm sure Tim Paisly knows a lot more than me! it just seems wrong in my head.

[salokcinnodrog]

I thnk the problem with the short rigs is that Carp aren't actually getting the bait to the back of their throat to crush it down. We are trying to hook them the second they pick up the bait, whereas with the longer rigs we could be getting more strikeable indications by allowing the Carp to actually get the bait right back.

 

If the Carp are testing baits by rolling them around then the short hooklink is going to give less movement and at the same time give us that twitch/bleep that means 'you've been done'.

The longer hooklength gives the bait freedom to move and then the Carp can move off with the hook unable to use the Lead as a resistance point.

 

If we take this a little further, if you hook a Carp at the edge of the lips and have hookpulls on occasional fish then the hooklink or hair is probably too short. If we can get the bait to the back of the Carps throat we are giving ourselves more time to get a strikeable indication.

[ripslider]

Salok and Adam,

 

I think I need to clarify a few of my own thinkings slightly.

 

First, my original post was very much a generalisation. I am totally convinced that there is no right answer to rig's, I was just trying to split the two apart.

 

Seondly, I think that where Salok was talking about PVA bag fishing, he thought about, but didn't say, the answer to his own question. Going back to Rule Two, Bait, which includes "getting the fish to feed" then you've done this at this point. Therefore, if you them match Rig to Bait/feeding, your on a winner but maybe with a few subtle modifications.

 

 

Adam's question about the rejection with longer hooklengths I think I can give evidence for.

 

As you know, I'm a huge fan of free-lining, and I always advise that the rod should be held. This is becuase, when free-lining, the carp generally give hugely confident takes. There is a lake about 10 miles from home that is generally very clear with the morning sun on it, and I try and test things that I'm thinking about here. I can sit on a high bank and watch the reactions of a few riggy carp under my feet. I have seen lots of times that, given sufficient free line, a carp will happily move 10 yards carrying a free-lined bait. However, if I introduce "stuff" to the rig, then that Time to reject falls away quickly.

 

I can't explain this. I know that it happens with Chub, Eel's and Perch as well. They seem happy enough with a bait that is just attached to a line.

 

I think the long hooklength allows for confidence, as everything moves a lot more naturally in the water in "tench", "pike" and "rudd situations.

 

For the hooklength's I either use merlin when I'm really having to fight for takes, which I leave in cold black tea overnight then allow to dry, or more generally I use plain mono.

 

However, the mono choice is important. Maxima is OK, but for me I feel it's very stiff, as is Soft Silk and Warrior, which I also tried. Now, I use Diawa Match Winner in 8lb, which is as limp as cotton. It really is incredible stuff. No memory at all. This I feel is acting as I want it to on the bottom.

 

I could use braid all the time, but it's an extra "thing" that I would have to add to the rig, and generally I try and steer clear of that.

 

I think the other major point in the paternoster is that fact that thing long rig gives more confidence, and works in more senario's, but the paternoster itself always for firstly much better bite indication, and secondly is mechanically very different, and when I'm chasing carp in hard water's "different" is what I want.

 

With a soft 6" link between line and lead, everything moves very differently. Importantly, indications can be transmitted from the hook to the rod indicator ( I use my hands or bobbins, but same thing with optonic's ) without any movement through against the lead. This means that the fish can move the bait the length of the paternoster without creating any moment of force that it can sense.

 

You can see this with an experiment:

 

Three rods in a pod:

 

Rod One: Short heavy rig

Rod Two: Long hooklength to either running lead or in-line lead

Rod 3: Long hooklength to a paternoster.

 

Rod three will act very differently than you are used to. If you put down a large bed of feed across all three rods, then rods one and two will generally be silent apart from the odd bleep until you get a run. Rod three will chatter away nearly constantly, as every line bite, knock, pick up and drop, is transmitted to the indicator.

 

I'll do a bet hat, other things being equal, rod one will get less bites than 2, and rod hree more than rod two.

 

However, it's also aquestion of desire. Some people willnotwan theconsan chatter, bu for me, I like ha, becuaseit lets me know what's happening, where the fish are and more imporanly, where hey are not.

 

The last thing I like about the paternoster is that the lead is hanging free. not only does his mean that weak links can be used for snaggy area's ( with long casts, I use the "pin rig" that sea anglers use, so U can cast alead wih a 2lb bottom 100 yards totally safely ) bu also the lead is no direcy on the line, which means hatit can not be used as a point of leverage against the carps tail if it tries to barrel roll.

 

I see he paternoserandlong tail as"A good point to start" rather han he ultimae rig. irstlyit's "different" secondly i lets me know what's going on, and thirdly it gives me a lot more senario's thatcan be covered in a single rig and setup. from here, If I keep hitting a water, I'll tune it, but only if required.

 

My general rig for open water is this:

 

Line is 8lb Match winner, with a hook to suit the bait. ( this ranges from 12 to 1/0)

 

1 BB shot 18 inches from the hook. Run ring is rod ring from a flat rod with the legs cut off, so that I can use an SiC ring. Paternoster is 6" of 6lb line, to a 3/4 ounce lead.

 

This is obviously tuned as required. If I'm getting a huge number of indications, and no solid runs, the length of the tail is increased until the runs start. Sometimes the tail is 4 foot. I generally extend in 6" intervals. If however, I'm geting runs which drop, I bring the hooklegth down in legth by three inches at a time.

 

In deep weed, I'm going to legthen the paternoster. Also in silt. Some vasaline on the ring will let you know when your long enough.

 

In practise, I cast and let the lead hit the deck. I then hold my rod so the tip is at shoulder level and wind in a single turn of my reel handle. On my F.s reel, this equates to 2 foot 3 ". This straightens then tail and paternoster.

If I then drop the rod tip low, the slack line lets everything "relax" into what ever position it wants.

 

Steve

[Guest Anonymous]

Ok then there's plenty of views on the length of the rig, but what about the length of the hair? It was mentioned earlier about a longer hair acting more like a free offering and being more likely to be picked up, surely this also means that the when the bait is being taken in the hook will be closer to the front of the lips than the back due to the distance between them?

I do think a rig with a long hair would be harder to eject as when the bait is blown out there is a delay before any hook movement [is this making sense?]

From what we have already discussed it would seem that a long hair on a short rig would be a disadvantage.

If the hair was shorter the hook would get taken back further as it would be closer to the bait, but I think this also means that if the carp blows the bait out the hook will be ejected just as easy as the bait.

Would a line aligner help here? I don't think so as IMO the rig has to be dragged across something for the hook to turn/dig in or am I wrong?

Also its fair to say most people use a knotless knot mainly because it's easy to tie and has proven itself as a good rig..but would a hair coming off a different part of the hook make a difference to the hooking potential, or even the rig being picked up in the first place? [i dont mean in front masking the point! lol!]

[ripslider]

Adam.

 

I don't use hair rigs a great deal for carp. I don't see that they are a bad thing in any way, but again, I keep things simple until I have to. Pike, for example, I ALWAYS hair rig for. I think in order to work out hair rig lengths, we need to take a hair rig apart.

 

Imagine a single bait on the bottom, a free offering. I use them rarely myself, so I may get the mechanic's slightly wrong, but I'll say a Boilie.

 

A carp comes along, and, either via "tench", "pike" or "rudd" method, it takes it into it's mouth.

 

It has no hands to hold a fork, so it must use suction to bring it past it's lips. Once there however, it will use it's tounge to move the bait from the front to the back of it's mouth. In all modes of feeding, it will regually pick up detritus of the bottom, like twigs, sticks, stones etc. It's tounge will move these to one place in it's mouth while moving the feed back. Once it has the bait at the back of it's mouth, if will chew with it's teeth ( please don't make me spell the proper word...) and swallow. It will them blow out any of the "bits" that it has accumulated.

 

How lets look at a bait on a hair.

 

Bait is picked up and is sucked in to the front of the mouth. The tounge then passed the bait backwards, while manovouring the rubbish. Carp have pretty large mouths. Measuring my own mouth just now, and making a guess about a twenty pound fish by scaling down, I would estimate about 2 1/2 inches.

 

Also, having timed how long it took me to move a boiled sweet around my mouth, and then assuming it would be the slower for a carp becuase have have relatively smaller tounges compared to mouth size, I would say that it could take from 1.5 - 2 seconds to move a big bait this distance.

 

So what happens.

 

Bait is moved in, and pulls the hook with it. if we assume the fish hasn't ever seen a hook, it is likely that it will take the bait all the way to the back teeth. As it does so, it moves. The angler strikes, and fish is landed.

 

A fish that has been hooked a few times is also takes in the bait. This time, it does so slightly slower, and knows to eject a hook. Bait comes in and moves backwards. The fish senses the hook with it's tounge ( I'm going to assume a carp's lips, like mine, probably aren't sensitive enough to detect the difference between a hook and a stick ), and blows to eject.

 

As it blows, the hook is in front of the bait. The ejection will also cause a panic movement by the fish, a turn. The eject willbring the hook into a "hooking" position, and the turn will, if we use a short rig, cause a hooking.

 

If the fish has been cuaght maybe twenty times, I'm going to guess it is even more careful. If it feels a hook like object, it will eject even quicker.

 

So, for "fresh" carp, I would say the hair doesn't help, for "not fresh" carp, I would say a short hair, for maximum hooking, and for spooky carp, I would say that a long hair for any chance of hooking at all.

 

However, I think there are a few tempering factors.

 

The fish goes back to rule 3), which is that rig is the least important bit. A spooky carp, I would argue, is less likely to put a bait that is on a short stiff link in it's mouth than one that is looking at a bait on a long flowing link.

 

With the line aligner, I guess it will, to some degree, help hook more fish than a knotless knot rig would, but a line aligner presents the bait oddly, is covered with plastic etc, so I would make a guess that the number of fish that take a bait that is on a line aligner would be less than on a different rig, but the number of "un-assisted" hook up's of those fish that did would be greater.

 

Which rig is best? If we look at the line aligner, D-rig, knotless knot etc, in fact anywhere where the hair comes from the sproat of the hook, and imagine the mechanics, This is what I believe is happening.

 

The bait is pulled in. At that moment, when the bait is moving the hook, the hair will take the straightest path to it's point of attachment on the hook.This will have the effect of moving the hook sideways on to the carp's mouth. I believe that this will increase the likelihood of it detecting the hook and eject.

 

If the hair was tied to the BEND of the hook, it would pull the hook stright in, giving the smallest profile to the carp. I think that this would decrease the likelyhood of an eject for tat crucial 1 second or so.

 

Hmm.. a re-read shows that this is nonsense. I have drawn a picture.

 

 

Badly Drawn Picture

 

 

My own method is that I use big baits which obscure the hook totally. Big lumps of bread or a ball of worms or three mussels. The the lips and tounge can't sense the bait then I hope that I can get a hooking.

 

I haven't wriiten about the effects of line of hooking, and that's purely becuase I can't do anything about it. A hook has an eye at the top that I have to tie line to. I can't get around that one.

 

I think a rig sits in between one of two extremes.

 

The first is total confidence. a free-lined rig.

 

The second is a totally self hooking rig. Rig One above for example.

 

Most rigs trade off some of one trait to gain more of another.

 

I believe, and to myself at least have proven through my own testing, that a total confidence rig leads to more potential takes, and so more actual fish on the bank. Others will disagree, but I'm happy with that statement.

 

However, the way I fish means that I can't ever sleep next to the rods becuase I have to strike at every bite. That's something that I'm happy to do, but it doesn't suit others, so there needs to be a degree of Self hooking ability worked into the rigs.

 

Again, it's back to the three rules of location, bait, and rig.

 

The perfect hair rig is of no use at all if there are no fish to catch, or the bait moves, or doesn't move, in such a way that the fish won't take it into their mouths.

 

Also, I fear that we could get caught up in the "forgetting 95% of angling" thing. Hair rig's aren't REALLY needed, Chris yates broke the record with no hair, which Hutchinson and Co where battering redmire with boilies and and hair-rigs. He put a bait in front of a fish.

Steve

[salokcinnodrog]

The original Hair Rig set-up consisted of a hooklink less than 0.6m (2ft) with a size 4 hook and a hair of 5-7.5cm (2-3in). It was designed to eliminate the sucking and blowing of baits , that occur even with free baits. What made the hair successful was that hard baits were used , the bait having to be taken to the back of the Carp's mouth to be crushed.

 

There are 3 places that a hair can be attached to the hook and my theory of what happens.

1) From the eye,

2) Off the Bend,

3) Along the shank.

 

A hair swinging from the eye of the hook will be fine when the hook and bait are blown out, but on sucking or picking up could actually hook outside the mouth or not entering at all.

 

A hair attached to the bend of the hook will definitely be sucked in the right way, but when blown out the hook will be turned in the mouth, exiting bait and bend first, with little chance of the hookpoint catching.

 

 

A hair attached to the shank of the hook I think ensures that the hook goes in the right way , bend first, and when ejected it will pivot round trying to force the hook out eye first, thus hooking in the Carps lip.

 

Now in modern fishing the hair has become shorter to become the Ultimate Bolt/Anti Eject rig. The hair is normnally now around 1/2 to 1inch long. In addition the hooklength has now become shorter, now between 6-9inches long.

 

The short hair, short link and tight line all contributing to the fish hooking itself when it tries to spit out the hook. However this short hooklink/short hair and tight line approach mean that the only indications of takes are those in which the Carp have hooked themselves.

 

Sucking fish, I have watched and checked other research, suck from as much as 6inches away from the bait. Baits that are on a short hair will spring back as the hair reaches its full length. This suck is often powerful enough to register a twitch on the indicator.

 

Now I agree with Steve that the best way of de-registering resistance is to minimise the lead attached directly to the line. (Work That one out).

 

If you can change the hair length to something that the Carp are not expecting, maybe going back to the original concept of the hair in its confidence rig scenario with a paternoster, then you should have excellent indication, no resistance and extremely confused and more hooked Carp.

[ripslider]

I agree, which is why I use that rig for most of my carp fishing.

 

But I don't just think it's becuase the carp "aren't expecting it", I think it would work just as well, in fact I know it does, with carp that haven't been hooked before.

 

However, as I said, the rig, while being great at catching fish, isn't great for having a snooze next to. It does mean that there has to be a real strike every time that you have a fish on the line. If you just leave the bites to develop, in most cases the bait will simply be dropped. This is something that many in the carp world, I feel, will not trade off.

 

It is also the reason I don't fish hugely long sessions. 36 hours is about as long as I can go and still concentrate on a float or bobbins. After that, I need to kip, so if I'm doing a long stint, I wind in and get my head down for a few hours, because I'm not going to wake up easily after that for a while.

 

It's like I said on the distant days of the top of page two. There are times when the heavy, short linked shock/bolt rig is a better way of fishing. But I don't think there are a huge number of these times, times when it's BETTER than a flowing link. It works well for "tench" if they take the bait and then do the "move" part, but the flowing rig is good for that as well, along with all the other circumstances.

 

Steve

[salokcinnodrog]

Quote by Ripslider

"It's like I said on the distant days of the top of page two. There are times when the heavy, short linked shock/bolt rig is a better way of fishing."

 

Steve, while I agree with you on most of that I don't think that the Heavy Lead 'n' Short Link is a better way of Fishing. I agree with the Heavy part, but I think that Short Links with a Heavy lead result in a lot of Fish being lost, either due to Hookpulls in the fight or in the Fish being wary of the End Tackle. If the fish is lost in the fight on a short Hooklink, I think that the bounce with the Lead so close to the Carps mouth results in the hook being bounced out. I actually lost a Carp last night on a Short Link with a Heavy lead, the first time in ages I have dropped below 7inch hooklink. It is also the 1st Carp I have lost in about 3 years due to a hookpull.

 

As for being awake having to strike with either a Fixed Paternoster or Running Lead again you are right. It is that having to strike with a proper Running Lead or Paternoster that put many Anglers off.

 

I don't class as a Running Lead a lead that can run free but with a tight Line. By definition the lead is not able to run when the line is tight to the rod tip and reel. You are creating a Fixed Point in the Tackle.

Please note I have corrected my Error in my Previous post, I missed out 2 important letter on my comment about Resistance

[Guest Anonymous]

I watched part 3 of the korda series today, it backed up my theory about the longer rigs being easier for the carp to eject than the shorter rigs, you can actually see the carp picking up the bait and loosing the hook [because it has a lot of movement due to the length of the rig] the carp doing this did not even register a bleep on the bite alarm! how many times is it happening to us?!

The longer rigs did not really get more attention than the shorter rigs although the shorter rigs hooked more carp as they bolted as soon as they felt resistance [i think they are shocked because of the resistance so soon after picking the bait up, is this what is catching them out?]

The fish were just as easily spooked off either the long or short rigs but once thay had decided to take the bait the shorter rigs worked better to hook them.

They seemed more spooked by the rig tubing or the line than the actual rig itself,

I know this is only footage from 1 dvd and carp feed differently in other waters but it was great to watch and made me think of this thread!

[ripslider]

Salok,

 

I see what your saying, but I think that there are still times when it works. The Method springs to mind as a situation. I know that it's probably not tempted a huge number of monster carp, but many 100lb+ catches of carp none the less. At a specific time, in a specific place, it has a place.

 

However, I totally agree that in 99% of cases it is not "better" and in fact, it is "worse", and the two don't nessecarily link to each other.

 

Yes, I think that the paternoster rig will never become trendy becuase of the need to watch it carefully. And I think that if it did, we would be in a world of deep hooked carp and furious letters to carp talk saying how bad a rig it is in general.

 

Adam,

 

I haven't seen Episode III, but I'm guessing that the rig was not a long linked paternoster, it was to a striaght running lead or an in-line lead?

 

If so, think back to what has been said about movement and bite detection. I think it comes down to this:

 

A lead can can play two jobs in a rig.

 

1) Carry out a baited hook and make it sink in a specific place

 

2) Act as a point of resistance to cause a hooking.

 

The ideal rig in all cases, for every fish, is to just have a hook and line. This means that they have maximum confidence in taking a bait and minimum resistance.

 

For two, the ideal rig is a three pound weight attached to a 2" hooklength. (Actually, I've used three pound legers before... for char )

 

This rig is almost certain to hook every fish that takes a bait into it's mouth automatically.

 

However, rig 2 will have a lot less fish actually take the bait.

 

The idea behind the running paternoster is that we try to minimise to as great an extent as possible, theaction of the lead on the rig, and therefore make it as much like a free-lined rig as possible. Where as we have to pay attention to it, becuase the bait acts, we hope, a lot more naturally, the carp has no desire to reject the bait in the first place. We are simply using the lead to take the bait out to a specific place and reduce the effects of tow. We hope that everything else seems to be free lined.

 

Sadly, there is no fishing for Steve over the weekend, due to very ill Ma's, but I will be putting in a few after work sessions, where I'll experiment and report back.

 

If anyone else would like to experiment and come back to the thread with findings, that would be great as well.

 

I plan to fish two rods in a single baited patch. First a running paternoster, second a short link/heavy lead. I will have the rigs maybe 20 foot apart over an even area of lake bed. Bait will be the same on both rigs, and I will feed the entire area with hemp, which should fall pretty evenly accross the area.

 

Steve

[Guest Anonymous]

Yes your right mate, they used a fixed lead in all but one of the rigs, I see what your saying now!

[salokcinnodrog]

Just for the Record when I fished last night and had 2 carp and 1 bream all of the fish were hooked on a Slack Line Running rig.

 

The first Carp didn't run, I don't think that on a 9inch hooklength it actually knew it was hooked until I struck on 3 bleeps of the Delkims. Incidentally I have my Clutches set very tight, so I can try to pull the Carp off balance. This Carp was hooked on a 9inch hooklink, line aligned and the hair was only about 24mm long, with an 18mm boilie, allowing just 6mm of travel. The rig material was Super Mantis and the Running Lead was 3 oz

 

The 2nd Carp was hooked on a fluorocarbon hooklink of 9inches with a hook line aligned and a D-rig. The swivel end had a loop on it and the bait was an18mm boilie and half a Squid and Octopus 14mm pop-up on the hair loop to sit it nicely on the weed Carpet.. Again taken on a slack line and 3 oz Running Lead.

 

Now in theory both these rigs are complicated. Both were fished over a previous Baited Patch that I think was just the smell remaining in the bottom until I topped it up with a couple of PVA bags of boilies and Pellets.

[ripslider]

Hello folks.

 

I've been doing a bit more experimenting with simple rigs, and seeing if I can get them to be any better. All the testing I did was at a "big fish" commercial and at an old lake that has an overhang where I can watch what happens.

 

I looked at the following things:

 

Paternoster length

Hooklength

rig material

Other stuff

 

For paternoster length, I couldn't see much difference in reaction in anything over a foot. This seems to be about the height that baits move up and down with tail wash from feeding carp, and when they are doing a "blow" sort of feeding. Also, if they are bottom feeding, they start with their heads down, but I noticed that they don't FULLY right themselves, they stay head down even when moving, until they go from feed mood to movement mood. This means that they never right themselves move than a foot upwards. I tried longer paternosters, up to 4 foot, but it dodn't seem to make a noticable difference.

 

Hook length I looked at length, and again, more than 1 foot didn't make a huge difference. This does mean that there is two foot of virtually free movement for the fish to make, which gives a lot of indications at the rod. Some of the guys who watched me fishing, who were used to fishing tight lines and heavy leads were asking me to hit a lot of these movements, as they weren't used to it, and I tried it a few times, but I just got lots of misses. Best to sit on your hands I guess.

 

I also looked at material. Becuase I don't really want to get into adding swivels, extra knots etc to an already full rig, I stuck with nylon, but I did have a thought about this. At the moment, a lot of fishing is done with Short, stiff rigs, so I automatically wanted to fish as far away from this as I can. While it does have it's uses, I wanted movement in the rigs, and for them to act as naturally as possible.

Something that I noticed when last out after chub was that the line I used sank really quickly ( it was Maxima ). This made me wonder if, when the line is on the deck, it will be effecting the bait, which would move naterally when there were big fishh around. I went looking in my odds and sods drawer for a line that was as close to neuterally bouyant as I could find. I tested in my pond. The best that I found, that was a LOT better than maxima, and my current line ( Diawa Match Winner ) was a line called Cenitam ( with a cheesy picture of bob nudd on it ) that came on the cover of a magazine. < This line is AWESOME for pole fishing by the way >.

 

However, it has no stretch and it's in 6.5lb, so not right for big fish. Now I'm looking for something similar, but struggling. I will let you know if I get anything.

 

I also played about with bite detection. The first thing I noticed is that on three occasions in the last two months or so, I've noticed, when I touch leger, "tremble bites". You should read Richard Walker for mor details of these, but he said that he only ever found them with Barbel. I struck on all three occassions, and hooked two, and landed one carp. This is a bit screwy, but maybe it means that carp have a fourth, barbel-like way of feeding????

 

 

I also made a new indicator for when touch legering is too much effort. Basically, cut the middle out of a paperclip, and your left with the loop around the outside. This can be easily clipped onto the line and taken off again. A piece of line with some shot on it counters any wind. This is light enough to use with freelining, and seems to fit well with loose rigs. Also free!

 

 

Something I saw in CarpOLOGY and Total Carp was pictures of guys with free running rigs, but with their indicators on the floor. This doesn't seem a huge lot of use to me. if the carp moves towards the bank at all, the bite won't register. My thinking is that indicators should be half way betwen rod and floor, but interested what others think. What do you guys do?

 

I've also started tying the lead to the line with PVA tape once the rig is made. The lead is tied up, with the lead towards the rod and not the lead. This makes casting a bit easier in tangly places, and it gives me that fraction extra confidence that that there are no tangles. After it's been out for a few minutes, drawing 6" of line back means that everthing is free-floating.

 

Tight lines

 

Steve

[Guest Anonymous]

Hello mate, I have witnessed wht you are saying about people having there indicators on the floor and agree that a drop back would not register, however most of todays indicators would be to heavy to fish a slack line and have up & down movement, I think the 'tackle tart' image stops people using paper clips etc as indicators, I wonder if they would use them if they really thought about it?

 

As for the neuterally boyant line/hooklength, would you rather have a line that would sit on the bottom and not spook the carp or a line that may well 'loop up' thus needind weight adding and defeating the object?

would a braid be better in this situation?

[ripslider]

Adam,

 

I think that the "tackle tart" image may not be as bad as some think, what I do think is that carping is seen as difficult, so people read and emulate what they read and see.Then they show others etc. Therefore, there would seem to be a core group of angling writers and broadcasters that are driving everything towards a single direction. That mean's if they are saying "you need a damn sexy bite alarm be within the slightest whisker of catching a fish" then this attitude cascades downwards to most other carpers.

 

Trivial example: Everyone that I see fishing uses fast actioned rods of probably 3lb test. This is, I guess, becuase everyone else uses them. And sometimes this is the right tool for the job, but those times are very few and far better. Far better to use a rod actually designed for carp fishing, a stepped up avon rod, which in every way far out performs a fast actioned broom handle for everything but 80 yard plus casts with a mimimum of 4oz of lead. The curves and compression sequences of what are now called Barbel rods where specifically designed to handle long casts with big weights, while being able to apply power at range without bumping on the strike, and ensuring safety at the net.

 

What are described as carp rods today are simply settped up thames roach rods of 50 years ago. They still use the same maths and compression calc's as they did back then to design them, they just make all the dimensions slightly bigger.

 

So why isn't everyone using these? Lot's of reasons, but I figure that one of the major ones is "that's the type of rod that everyone uses for carping". Those idea's have to come from somewhere.

I guess that paperclip hangers fall into the same catorgory.

 

For line, I know that the current thinking is for everything to be nailed to the deck but I'm pretty against that.

 

I think of it this way. Fish live in water, which is a different world to ours, so I need to try and think what happens in their world rather than what makes sense in mine.

 

What there is in the carp world, on the bottom at least, is lots of long floaty elements. This could be trailing pieces of weed, old line that drifts around, bits of old bag etc. Therefore I guess carp will probably accept another floaty thing.

 

What a carp won't, I think, accept, is, if it finds a trove of 50 baits, the one bait that moves differently to all the others. If you had 50 bowls of baked beans in front of you, and one of the dollops of beans was purple, which would you eat?

 

What I'm looking for is a line which makes the least impact on the movement, or lack of it, on the bait as possible. I want something that makes the bait act as close to normal as possible. This will never be totally ossible, but, if by choosing a different line I can spook even one in 10 less fish, I'm a happy boy.

 

That's why I want something totally nuetrally bouyant. That way it should be acting as little on the bait as possible, but at the same time will move in the water, if a carp comes near it or touches it, as close to everything else it has encountered with safety as possible.

 

Does this make any sence? It's 3:20 am, insomnia is KILLING me and I feel like I've rambled all over my reply without actually coming anywhere near your question.

 

Steve

[Guest Anonymous]

Hi, yeah it makes sense!

 

I don't know enough about rods to comment but i'm sure your correct.

 

I see what your saying about the carp coming into contact with weed & debris on the bottom so line should not be a problem but I have seen them spook of line, tubing etc, I wonder why they do this? They must spook off other more natural items but I guess were not really paying attention as its not what we're looking for at the time.

I suppose the slacker the line the more natural it would be to the fish? A tight line sloping down to a baited rig can hardly be natural as I can't think of anything in the carps natural environment that would look anything like this.

[don't know if this makes any sense to you? lol!]

 

 

I don't think I understood what you meant about the hooklink earlier but I do now, I agree a "totally nuetrally bouyant" rig would be brilliant, i'm just not to sure it's possible!

Anything to act as naturally as possible to the fish has to be a good thing.

[patos1]

WOW

and i thought nick was a thinking fisherman, steve (ripslider) you take the biscuit, no, not the biscuit the whole damn tin!!! superb reading:D

 

now for my 2 'peneth

 

now adamxx knows i've been using an old rod and reel to do a bit of float fishing recently, an old (its nearly 30years old) 10ft glass fibre barbel (avon) rod of about 1.25-1.5 tc with a mitchell 410 loaded with 20lb, yes 20lb:eek: mainline. i have been using lobworms for bait with a piece of 5mm dowel for a float and tied directly to the line a size 6 korda longshank x.

 

my local is not a particularly hard water but in the past 2 years or so it has become definetly more difficult to tempt them, that is if you are doing what everyone else is doing and sitting behind a pair of rods cast into the middle or tight to an island and using boilies for bait.

 

recently since the middle of may or so i have noticed a lot of fish tight in the margins in groups of 6 or 7 fish, realy tight, inches from the bank and thought i'd try a bit of the old stalking for them. so with my trusty kit listed above and leaving my buzzers, lc's, 12ft rods at home into battle i went!!

 

needless to say i've caught a few, more than a few in fact, i've had my best season in years and have had more fish than all the other guys on the lake. nearly all doubles as well, and this in a lake with a large head of small fish.

 

all i have been doing is baiting a few spots with a couple of handfulls of hemp and just walking around from spot to spot looking for feeding fish.

 

the point of all this typing is......

on many occasions i have cast beyond a group of carp all tails up on my hemp, pulled it back amongst them and watched (sat on my hands) as they have carried on feeding, pulling the float under whilst catching the line endlessly, its sometimes been quite difficult to distinguish what is a bite and what isnt. i have had to match the floats speed with a particular fish sometimes to be sure it is a bite.

very very exciting!!!

 

now until everyone cottoned on and the fish have now moved away from the margins i was expecting to catch a couple of fish at least, and this in sessions of no more than 3hrs morning or evening. my rig, if you can call it that, is 'heath robinson' to say the least yet i have caught many fish.

 

now IMHO if you can see a carp, you stand a very good chance of catching it, providing you can put something it likes to eat on its nose and more importantly, it doesnt see you. the rig is (again MHO) the 3rd thing on the list.

 

location, bait, rig.

 

one more thing, i have enjoyed this fishing much more than sitting static behind a couple of rods on buzzers. now if i can only find out where these fish are hanging out now:)

 

before that i'm off to get some paperclips:D

[patos1]

forgot to say.

when i walked on the lake with 'the old brown rod' as its affectionately known most of the lads fishing on there couldnt hide their sniggers.

now its 'humble pie' all round:D

[Guest Anonymous]

OMG, after reading this thread i have learnt more of ripslider, salok and others than i have off anybody. i will be definately be changing the way i approach a fishing session in the futre.

 

thanks guys:D

[dannym]

wow ...... after reading 4 pages of that my head hurts and i don't think i'll ever go fishing again !! :D

[maxwell999]

Can i just say what a great post this is. Posts like this are the reasons you come to these forums so let me chuck my 2 pence in.

 

In the past i always stuck to 4-5 rigs for all my fishing but this season i have mixed things up a lot. The withy has been one of my best catchers also the hinged stiff rig has caught well to its a confidence thig as much as any thing

I do think alot of the presentations that you see in mags are just there to fill pages and to an extent push certain products on us but i have learnt a lot from reading about them i understand rig mechanics much better for them. I now use tubing on most of my hook patterns to give the effect of bent hooks . The use of rings ad floss and the reasons behind its use etc etc but ultimately i wil stil always have more faith in in a single hook a piece of line and a swivele then a rig with 50 little pieces.

[salokcinnodrog]

I freely admit that a lot of the time I do experiment with rigs to find out what works in any given situation, as Steve (ripslider) does. I know that with Paternoster that indication is far improved over most other types of Lead Fixings. I also know you have to be awake and aware sat next to your rods to use it. I'm currently working on a way to make extending hooklengths work on a particular lake that is Heavily Match Fished, where the Carp are very cute. Where the Method is treated with disdain and where heavy baiting is the kiss of death.

 

 

Just to throw a spanner into the works again.

The rig I have caught most of my fish on this season is....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Plain Basic Hair rigged and Freelined Mixer. lol:D

 

 

 

Nick