By Brian Waldman
As you've probably figured out by now, I have a few 'pet peeves' when it comes to bass fishing. You can read several of them throughout the website or even in some of my other articles. For instance, one that ranks right up there with me is the common mistake where people get the terms "cover" and "structure" messed up. Many of you "old timers" like myself who read articles concerning Buck Perry, spoonplugs and structure fishing or who subscribed to Fishing Facts magazine probably don't have that problem. Weeds, trees, docks and brushpiles aren't structure, they're cover! Structure is the physical geography of the bottom of the lake...things like points, saddles, humps, creeks, ditches and bars. For a pretty decent article on the differences you can read this Paul Crawford article entitled Structure Fishing 101.
So what is my newest pet peeve, and why do I have a picture of a teeter-totter on this site? Well, if you remember back to your high school science days you probably recall that a teeter totter is nothing more than a form of lever. If you want a quick refresher course on levers you can check out this Wikipedia levers link. After that, you can drop in to Enchanted Learning and Technology Student for some simple animations of the different types (classes) of levers.
With that basic understanding complete, I can now go on my rant. Because as you've seen if you checked out the links, a fishing rod is nothing more than a lever. A pretty fancy and expensive one at that, but still just a creation of physics in action. Specifically though, a fishing rod is an example of a class 3 lever. The purpose of a lever is usually to gain mechanical advantage (MA). The term "leverage" is defined as "the mechanical advantage gained by using a lever".
So what's the problem and the peeve? How many times have you read how longer rods give you more leverage when fighting or playing fish? If you've paid attention it is actually quite a lot. I'm seeing it in articles, catalogs, in conversation and in web posts. The more I actually look for it the more instances I find. The problem is that it is simply not true! The measure for mechanical advantage (MA) is the ratio between load and effort. MA > 1:1 means that a gain in output force has been achieved and you have gained a positive mechanical advantage. MA < 1:1 means that the input force will be greater than the output and you actually have a "negative" (in the sense of less than 1.0 ratio) mechanical advantage. Negative MA means you didn't gain leverage.
From the links provided, you'll see that a fishing rod is an example of a Class 3 lever. Class 3 levers always have a MA < 1, therefore they would not be used to gain output force. In fact, the further the load (rod tip) is from the point of "input force" (you holding down by the reel) the more effort is required on your part. Subsequently, the longer the rod, the less leverage you have over a fish. In fact, the fish actually gains leverage on you. This may not be apparent to the average basser hauling in 3 and 4 pound bass over weed mats, because the loss is small relative to the size of and force applied by the angler, and easily compensated for in such instances. It becomes much more obvious at the extremes, for example deep water ocean jigging.
Class 3 levers are typically used where a gain in speed or range of motion is desired, or to conserve space. Long rods are a trade off, you giving up leverage but gaining range of motion for things like casting, slack line pickup and hook setting speed, or moving bass longer distances with the same amount of rod angle manipulating. It's similar to the trade off between power and speed in a fishing reel. The higher the gear ratio of a reel, the greater the amount of line you can reel in with a given turn of the handle. But you are giving up power to be able to do that. That's why deep cranking reels have lower gear ratios. Have you ever tried to crank in a DD-22 with a 6.2:1 gear ratio? It's also why I gave up on 7:1 gear ratio reels with power baits. The loss of power was so great that a decent fish could actually lock you up when it hit. But I digress...
To test out this long rod/leverage thing, here is a simple experiment you can do. I learned this one in grade school. Get an old fashioned straw broom and lay it on the floor. Put a small canned good on the straw part using it like a platform. Now, grab the broom handle right next to the straw and lift. Not too difficult really. Now move your hand halfway down the handle and try again. A little more of a struggle. Lastly, slide down and grab the very end of the broom and try to lift the canned good off the floor. Could you even do it? The weight of the small can didn't change. Bass on the end of your rod are no different...the longer the rod, the less leverage you have and the more leverage the bass has.
BTW, for another funny rant on the subject of fishing rods and leverage (turns out I'm not the only one) you can read this link to the R.T.F.I. web page.
So no big deal really from the standpoint that I'm not going to get rid of my 7' rods anytime soon, and I imagine you won't either. They definitely have their place and advantages in the world of bass fishing. Don't mistake this as an anti-long rod diatribe, because it's not. It's merely a rant over improper use of terminology. So start paying attention and see how many times you come across this little "myth", and I'll just keep shaking my head and cringing everytime I see it myself.
Comments