I find this an interesting topic because it mirrors some observations I’ve made when testing casting rods in a field behind my house.The grass is not closely cut and when casting a sinker to set up a rod, the sinker will usually get hung on a grass clump before you bring it all the way back in. So you have to tug at it with the rod to get the sinker to come loose. With a shorter rod you just tug it loose and it flips past the clump a few inches or a foot. With a much longer rod even a fairly limber one when it comes loose WHOA NELLIE BAR THE DOOR! I have had the sinker fly all the way back past where I was standing and that sucker will be moving!

I think I can generate a little more force with the shorter rod but only on a very short distance of movement. As far as speed and line movement the longer rod wins hands down. This explains to me why I rarely miss a hook set with the longer rods but still miss them or have fish toss the hook with much shorter rods.

One other thing we were taught as kids when setting the hook was to actually drop the rod tip and impart a little slack in the line before we swept the rod to set the hook. This supposedly allowed you to “POP” the hook into the fish’s mouth because the little bit of slack allowed you to get the hook moving and up to a little speed before it hit the fish. I have used this method for many years and it seems to work well with any length rod.

Jeff Shafer wrote; When I asked why, he pointed out that on longer distance hooks sets the rod feels too tippy and he feels he isn't getting a good hook set.
A non-scientific answer on my part is that when I first began to bass fish I used very short rods. Over the decades it became clear that the longer rod provided much quicker hook sets. Today I fish up to 150 days a year and a majority of my rods are 7'6" or longer, BECAUSE I LAND MORE FISH with them than with the shorter rods.
Jeff

Ken,

What you've experienced is exactly why fly fisherman who use their rods to make the hookset end up missing so many fish - they either rip the fly hook out of, or through, the fish's mouth. Or break off entirely. You have that long rod coupled with a fly line with almost zero stretch and the speed and force generated are simply tremendous. With full mono on a casting or spinning rod, the line helps to absorb at least some of the energy generated by the quick snap or sweep of a longer rod.

I know you weren't referring to fly rods, but for the record, with a fly rod you do not want to use the rod in the hookset. You lower the rod, point it at the fish and slip strike the fish with your line hand. This is very effective although somewhat hard to newer fly fishermen to get used to. Because you can only move the line so far by hand, it is imperative that you have the line tight or sufficiently tensioned by water in order to make that short movement count. Done properly, however, it's extremely effective.

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

Jeff,

Actually there is a scientific answer behind your on the water experience - you just didn't go into detail. What you've just done is voice the "what is" rather than the "what can't be" based on your own practical experience in using shorter and longer rods. And that's where it counts - out on the water.

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

Reading through this tread, I don’t see much said regarding attributes of shortening a rod. For what it’s worth….I’m not a “pro” nor am I looking for a “following”. Since hook setting is a non-issue with me, I’ve found that there are other advantages to a shorter rod. I’ve also found that for certain techniques, a much slower tip is advantageous and removing 2 to 4 inches from a tip can be beneficial.
I don’t expect to win any arguments on this issue, nor am I looking for one, but I think we need to consider rod length as one of many trade-offs that must be made in setting up a rod for the intended results.
Whether long or short rods being better at hook setting, testing the theories should be fairly easy. Maybe it could be part of an article in a rod making magazine. Although it may not have much to do with rod building, it is one of many attributes one should consider in a rods effectiveness…..much like “spiral” vs. “conventional” or "stiffness" relating to "sensitivity".

Jim;
Agreed there are times when I prefer a shorter rod. That consideration always has to do with the technique involved, with out taking into account the hook set. I do how ever have many more what are considered in the bass realm longer rods then shorter.

A recent customer reported problems with his leader breaking on hookset with a 7' 10" rod I built for him to use as a Carolina rig/small swimbait rod. Never having used a rod of that length and power he had no idea how much more effective his hookset had become. As Tom and others said the amount of line being moved with that rod is substantially greater than the 6' 6" rods he was accustomed to. Add to the equation that he was using braid as a main line and his hooksetting power is multiplied-his 15 lb mono leaders were not up to the task. Recommended that he either modify his hookset with that setup or change his main line to mono to add some stretch to compensate for his newfound hooksetting abilities. Unfortunate that he had not used it enough to find this out before being cost some fish in a TX.

The hookset on a carolina rig is done in a sweeping motion rather than a typical bass hookset. I find that by sweeping the rod horizontally rather than vertically increases my hook-up ratio. The sweeping motion should eliminate the break offs.
As a footnote to my previous post, I find that with many of my guide clients, the majority of them bring rods in the 6'6" length & shorter. I will normally wait till they have missed several fish & then place a longer rod of mine in their hands. A 100% percent of time the results are more fish in the boat, a happy client, & a potential rod sale.
Jeff

Smart man Jeff!

Jim,

We weren't debating the best rod length - that can only be determined by the task you need to accomplish. We were simply discussing whether removing a portion of a rod, effectively shortening it, would help or hinder hook setting. A longer rod is better for setting the hook, although it may not be the best thing when other attributes are more important.

For instance, the shortest, stoutest rods made are offshore stand-up rods. They are remarkably effective at fighting a fish, negating his leverage advantage against the angler and creating more of a "tug of war" situation. If the angler is stronger than the fish, the angler will whip the fish in a relatively short time. Much shorter than if he had been using a longer rod.

However, those same short, stiff stand-up rods are about the worst thing going for setting a hook. In that type of fishing, you hope that the fish helps a bit in this area by striking hard and moving away from the fisherman. But it doesn't always happen. This is why you see stand-up fisherman making repeated hook sets one right after the other - to cut/punch the hook through the fish's mouth which can rarely be done by a single sweep or quick hit with such a short, stout rod.

Because the stand-up guys are more interested in quickly subduing large fish that might otherwise overwhelm them or require a fighting chair, they opt for shorter rods. Fighting and quickly whipping the fish is their most important requirement so they choose rod lengths that allow them to do that effectively. If setting the hook was the more important task at hand, they'd use longer rods. It isn't, so they don't.


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

Tom,
That was not exactly my key point. I must not have stated my case very clearly and then we got side tracked on the sort of hook set that is required for Salmon and Steelhead. The key point that I was attempting to make was that you will lose leverage when the rod is shortened but the shorter rod being stiffer may well gain in terms of the force at the hook. The reason being that when a rod flexes it is temporarily absorbing energy and this results in less force at the hook. The more the rod flexes the less force at the hook. The stiffer the rod is the more of the force applied by the fisherman gets to the hook. And when the rod straightens some of the energy that the rod has absorbed is converted from kinetic energy to heat and does not get to the hook and some of the energy that the rod has absorbed does get to the hook but it gets to the hook later in time and does not aide much in terms of the force at the hook.
I think that how much the rod stiffens when it is shortened is a function mainly of the rods action. A fast action rod when shortened will tend to get stiffer then a slower action rod of comparable initial power with the same amount of shortening. Which says that whether you gain or lose in terms of the force applied to the hook when a rod is shortened is determined by the rods action.

I think everyone here understands that, it's elementary, but everything else being equal, a longer rod sets the hook more effectively than a shorter rod, and often even if the longer one is much softer or more limber than the shorter one. The speed and distance generated by the longer rod more than offsets any power you lose with a bit of flex, most of which does not occur until after the hook is already moving and hits something solid.

It would take an extremely soft and extremely slow action rod, much more so than what is commonly used in most fishing situations, to negate the benefit of added length when trying to set a hook. You could make a rod as wispy as a blade of grass and you'd certainly never set a hook into anything with it, but that whole scenario is outside the realm of any practical application a fisherman would be confronted with.


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

All of the hook set conditions noted above need to be balanced and applied properly for everyone to be a happy camper. If any one of them happens to be out of whack it can pose problems. What happens when you hand an inexperienced young, strong bass fisherman a short, high modulus, stiff, high quality rod for use in close in pitching with braid who has seen the pros on TV slamming a hook home and dancing on the front of a bass boat in front of a camera. What happens can send many rod builders to the poor house. The manufacturers call them a good break - the limit of the blank was exceeded during a hook set shock load episode - you will probably see three or more broken segments.

Tom, Steve, Bill, Jeff, Ken and Tim, Emory has provided hardcore evidence that you are either all lying, under the influence of drugs or have wild imaginations. Time to come clean because he has proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that your statements relating to your on the water experiences are impossible. You may all claim to have experienced more sure and solid hooksets with a longer rod but now we all know this cannot be true.

Getting back to the original poster's question, if you trim 4" from the tip you will NOT improve the hooksetting ability of that rod.

You will have to either believe the infallible numbers and imutable laws of the universe or you can go try it for yourself and join the ranks of those who say that they have experienced that a longer rod leads to more solid and secure hooksets. Of course we are all crazy, lying or on drugs, but we aren't losing as many fish due to poor hooksets as we were before we moved to slightly longer rods. Personally I am going to keep my longer rods and just ignore those who tell me that the numbers prove that I cannot be doing what I know I'm doing.

Chris, sorry I forgot to add that like the rest of us, you are crazy too.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/27/2008 08:34PM by Bill Colby.

How about adding five or six ounces of weight to the butt of the rod? The momentum of this extra weight should really drive the hook home.

Bill,

There are indeed immutable laws that govern the universe and they do not and cannot fail. But they must be applied correctly and within the specific and practical realm in which you’re working.

In fact, any time you find something that works - it works for a reason. If you can't explain why or have a reason that it shouldn't or couldn't work, those immutable laws you speak of haven't broken down, you just aren't behind the right one.

Saying that a longer fishing rod will set the hook more effectively than a shorter fishing rod is neither breaking nor contradicting any immutable laws - it’s obeying them.



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

Mr. Colby, as a matter of fact, I'm presently in counseling for my imagination. What I'd like to know is have you been watching me through the windows in order to gain evidence of the drug use. I'll be purchasing blinds tomorrow. But, I'm going to continue to use my 12'6" carolina rig rod. Wait a minute, there goes my imagination again. Well, it's back to the medicine cabinet for me.
Jeff

Tom,
I think that your statement "I think that everyone here understands that, its elementary" could not be more wrong. It is neither elementary nor does everyone who has made posts understand. But I have made my case and do not think that I will accomplish anything by debating it any further.

By the way, the question was never simply whether a longer rod would set a hook better than a shorter rod. Obviously it will if all other things are equal. Your statement to that affect is misrepresenting and over simplifying what the basis for the discussion was and your use of the term immutable law in the context that you used it is, in my judgment, pure sophistry.

Emory writes, "The reason being that when a rod flexes it is temporarily absorbing energy and this results in less force at the hook". So if as you say, "results in less force at the hook" we should be able to have you hold a bait in your mouth and as the rod flexes, it will apply no pressure to your tender lips and you will be able to spit the hook from your mouth before the line tightens again. Sorry. And then there's this, "The stiffer the rod is the more of the force applied by the fisherman gets to the hook. And when the rod straightens some of the energy that the rod has absorbed is converted from kinetic energy to heat and does not get to the hook and some of the energy that the rod has absorbed does get to the hook but it gets to the hook later in time and does not aide much in terms of the force at the hook". So.....................We now need to measure the amout of heat our rods are creating to really be able to access their true performance. So by; this time, Emory is holding the lure in his mouth,......when I pull on the long fishing rod, it will flex, creating a period that the lure will actually experience a negative force allowing him to spit the lure out before the heat generated by my flexed rod is able to create a time warp that allows the fish to get away. Wow, I've got to go to bed. Happy thanksgiving and I appologize for being the one to cause the computer censorship. Let's try to keep this fun with out the need for the rocket scientist mentality. Remember the being on the other end of the line is in the water. He just wants to eat. Put that food in front of him and then pull him into the boat. Be good, Greg Weaver, USAirways mechanic with a penchant for details.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/28/2008 09:11AM by Tom Kirkman.

I was the one that used the term immutable. Sorry I misspelled it. I was making a joke.

The very idea that I have ever lost a fish on a hookset due to a loss of kinetic energy through heat is just silly. That is really the point here. All these things do take place but like Tom said within the realm of things we are discussing they are neither here nor there.

You cannot get a hook into a fish until you take all the slack out of the pieces involved. Rod, reel, line, water tension, slack and that type of stuff. I do not care how much power you put into your hook set, until the hook actually moves your power is wasted. A longer rod removes and recovers all the slack in play better than a shorter rod.

Anyone that thinks that a shorter rod is better for hooksetting and wants to pull out physical laws to prove it needs to use the right laws. They are not being used by some here. To completely overlook the actual on the water experience by those who have posted here and the many experiences they have had with their customers is to border on being obtuse or obstinate. You can decide which one.

As far as people understanding or knowing the various physical laws, it is a mistake to think that people here are so simple minded that they do not understand such things. It is more likely that they do understand them but also have enough common sense to know when and how they apply.

I only hope that all that energy we are losing through kinetic heat loss will not boil the water in our lakes and rivers. At that point setting a hook will be the least of our problems.

It doesn't matter how much force you generate with your rod, if it doesn't reach the hook it won't do anything for you.

A longer rod (until it is so long that you can no longer move it as fast) will always be better for setting the hook than a shorter rod. Fishermen that are having trouble setting the hook or having many fish toss that hook during the ensuing fight are nearly always able to rectify the situation by using a longer rod. This isn't speculation or theory - it's fact.

We could come up with all kinds of conceivable situations to somehow prove this can't be true, but we'd also be coming up with scenarios that are far outside the realm of what actually happens when fishing.

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