I understand the CCS site will be up an running in a few days.

For those of you with too much time on your hands and a curiosity about how the CCS has been viewed in the outside world, you might get a kick out of looking at
www.sexyloops.com -The Board - Tackle - CCS, Oh No!

At last count, over 9000 views — over 30 pages and over 300 replies.

It's not for the faint of heart.

It has caught on in Europe faster than here in North America. To some extent, their fishing industry is not married to idea of "tradition" and they have been more open minded to new ideas and methods.

Either way, it's gaining ground. I viewed the new CCS site this afternoon. It's quite nice and with just a couple tweaks it will be ready to go. I hope to have it live by late Monday or sometime on Tuesday.

.........................

Bill,
I did not find the discussion on Sexyloops to be very rational. Most of those attempting to debate the merits of the CCS admitted that they had never even read through it let alone used it.

Bill,
Paul Aredn (Sexyloops owner) is a close friend of mine. He is an unbelievably talented caster, and a heck of a nice guy (with a great sens of humor I might add). I can assure all of you Paul is very well aware of what is going on with the CCS. He will be at my shop sometime early next year as we are outlining a project we will be working on together.
FYI, Kerry Burkheimer has expressed a VERY intense interest in the CCS system. There is a good possibilty he may start using it as a marketing tool in the future to aid his customers product knowledge.


Andy Dear
Lamar Mfg.

Bill,
Being laid-up with a sore back, I do have time to read. I followed your advice and read the discussion of CCS on Sexyloops. It was quite flattering. If someone takes the time to argue their views pro or con on your ideas then it is flattering. One question that was posed was how you arrived at flexing the blank down one third from the tip. How did you arrive at that distance?

A lot of people ask that same question, but in the end, it's not really important. At least no more so than the guy who decided how long an inch was going to be. It's just a consistent point for taking the measurements. Dr. Hanneman did come about that distance from more than a purely arbitrary standpoint, however, and I'll let him answer. (This will also be answered on the new site's Frequently Asked Questions page).

...................

Ellis,

I believe the short answer comes from a movie, "At the time, I thought it was a good idea."

The long answer follows"

2. How did you determine that a deflection distance equaling 1/3rd the rod's length was the correct amount for a fully loaded rod?

In hindsight, the use of the term “fully loaded rod” was unfortunate. My intent was merely to define a rod which had been deflected to the degree specified by my test procedure.

My reasoning for choosing the value of one third of the rod’s length was based on my understanding that it was common practice for rod makers to confirm their quality control by attaching a fixed weight to the tip of the rod and determining the shape the rod assumed. They then drew outlines on the background of their testing boards which defined the allowable limits for each rod. They used a different weight for each product and that weight was chosen on the basis of the weight necessary to deflect the tip sufficiently to produce a nice curve. This curve appeared to me to be approximated by the curve of a rod for which its tip had been deflected a distance equal to one third of the rod’s length. Under these conditions, all rods look very similar, except at the very tip.

By deflecting the rod tip a distance of one third of its length, I was able to essentially factor out differences due to length. This approach, I believed was more universal in application. Also, the slight angular differences shown at the tip made it possible to differentiate and quantitate rod action on the basis of what I called the Action Angle (AA).
----------
The net result of this was that I later became convinced that more information was necessary and this resulted in the creation of PT (Tip Power) and PR (Power Reservoir) which will be discussed in a future issue of RodMaker.

Thanks Tom and Bill,
Looking forward to viewing the new site.