The CCS is very easy to use. You cannot say otherwise just because a dozen or two dozen people are having trouble understanding how easy it is. Thousands of others truly are using it easily and productively. It is just as easy as a thermometer. Definitely.

Let me tell you why I won't submit any data to Bob's site. I have run the CCS numbers on almost 900 rods and blanks now. I recorded all the CCS numbers for each one and keep them here in a database. I have shared freely in the pages of RodMaker many articles including "The Simple Spiral." After it ran I got almost 200 E-mails from people about the article. Except for a few, nearly all the rest asked me to send them a free copy of the article or to explain the system to them in an E-mail. When I suggested they buy the magazine and read the article for themselves, I got E-mails back stating that I was an SOB and wasn't willing to share. What they were really telling me was that what they meant by 'sharing' was the ability to get free information at no expense or effort to themselves and that those who would not abide by their wishes were mean, nasty SOBs who would not "share". That was it for me. No more internet sharing from my end, ever. And I will bet there are many more rod builders, very good ones, that feel exactly the same as I do. I've talked to several that have published articles and went through the same thing I did. They're done too. You never see them around anymore and I know why.

It's sad because not everybody on the internet forums is like this and there are some very good people here. But too many forget that sharing is a two way street and those who forget that are the ones that ruin it for everyone else.

Robert,

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that. In the meantime we'll see how many manufacturers adopt the CCS versus the "RDA" or whatever.

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

Bill,

Yes, many of the article authors go through that. Ask Bill Stevens what happened after I published the article on threadless guide wraps that he wrote. His experience mirrors yours exactly. Rich Forhan has gone through it numerous times. And you're right, it's a shame because it kills a good deal of valuable information exchange for everyone else.

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

There are not that many that have trouble with it. And when you do see somebody taking exception to it it is always the same three or four guys. I would not worry about it.

My guess is that a lack of submissions is due to a several things. Most of us just do not think about doing it or do not have the time. I have measured several rods this month alone and just never really thought about sitting down and submitting them. I took the readings, did what I needed to do, and that was that. So I think for most it is just an oversight. And like Tom started out saying, for most it is probably a matter of most rod builders not really frequenting the internet sites much. Most may not even know that Bobs site exists!

Mr. Colby

I too wrote an article for Rodmaker and experienced absolutely nothing that resembles what you are referring to on this thread. All of my experiences were positive and I enjoyed sharing with the best group of like minded friends I have ever met. It had a very positive impact on me and I wouldn't hesitate to do it again. I made a lot of new friends because of it.

Some time back I made a "left handed" response to a post of yours on a particular thread. I was called down by the moderator in private and promptly extended an apology to the moderator and offered to make a personal apology to you and the whole board. I was given your contact information and advised that a board apology was not necessary.

You never responded to my contact attempt and that has bothered me every since.

Since you are indeed alive and well within the hour, would you please contact me? My email address is not hidden.

Bobby

Bobby Feazel

[www.shockwaverods.com]

Conventional wisdom will not open the box.

This afternoon I again asked Bill Stevens about his experience with such private emails after his article on the threadless guide wraps. He stated that he had such a bad experience with non-subscribers wanting a free article copy or an E-mail version that it came "To the point that I do not care to write another article for anyone!" That's Bill's exact quote from a few minutes ago.

Fortunately most authors haven't stopped writing for print publications, they've simply stopped sharing much via the internet. It's a loss for all but just one of those things that you can't do anything about nor is it likely to change.

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

If anyone would like a subjective evaluation of a rod or a blank I would be willing to share my list of snappy adjectives, but you must promise not to become angry.

It's unfortunate more people aren't willing to share their CCS data. It is easy to do and remain completely anonymous. That's the whole point of the database. And for the record, I don't find CCS difficult to use or understand. I use it and RDA on nearly every rod I build.

The original question posted by Chuck should be the focus. Without addressing the lack of data, more people will default to the other options.

What other options? All thats left is the current manufacturer systems which are unique to each company and cannot be used from one to another. Thats the only set of systems that any widespread data exists for and its unique to each manufacturer.

If there are any other systems, they would have to get exposure in something like Rodmaker for the rod building masses to ever take notice of them. Having a couple dozen guys on the internet behind something is not going to be enough to get it to catch on. Like it or not the CCS has the main things going for it. It works perfectly and it has been exposed to tens of thousands of rod builders in the pages of the magazine. I would be surprised it anything else could replace it at this point.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/22/2010 08:27AM by Peter Sprague.

Peter,
As has been mentioned already in this thread, there is a great deal of data available on the RDA website. Regardless of who uses CCS, I don't see this lack of data changing any time soon unfortunately. And quite frankly, I don't care if it's one guy or 10,000 guys using the system if there is data available. Without data, the system looses it's value for me and others as evidenced by the mere existence of this thread, especially when there are other similar systems out there with substantially more data.

By the way, here's what a big name rod designer said about CCS.
"Actually we had originally considered using the CC for this series but when performing the analysis found so many flaws in the system that decided it would be a lot of work for information that meant nothing to most people."

The brands which sell dreams rather than fishpoles have enjoyed the most commercial success: "Soulful, Sensitive, Fast, Powerful, New, Exclusive, Exciting, Feather-Light, Responsive, Delicate, Patented, Revolutionary, Balanced, Smooth" - yadda, yadda, yadda.

The "flaw" that they "found" was their own inability to build a fixture that would allow them to weight the more powerful rods without collapsing their fixture. That's not a fault of the CCS - that's the fault of their carpenter.

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