Discussion about this post

User's avatar
David Guest's avatar

I agree with your conclusion that yes, it does matter, but actually not nearly as often as we think. I reckon most anglers have caught on a fly they did not expect to catch on, when the real reason for that was presenting it well to a willing fish. By a similar token, we have all blanked fishing the perfect pattern for that day or conditions.

Here in the UK, there is a large stillwater trout fishing scene, and presentation is the number one most important factor to catching in those scenarios. Fly pattern is probably second or maybe even third.

Expand full comment
Jim Hester's avatar

More great thoughts from Mr. Juracek! It's about the process, not only the fly, so I very much agree. I'm convinced that what we see in the flies, what they might imitate, may not always be what the fish are mistaking them to be anyway. It's an assumption on our part, and only matters that the fly is something the fish will take. With so many many patterns now, only one of them can't be the only fly that will work, but we only tie on one fly at a time much of the time. I firmly believe in "matching the forage" regardless of fish species or where, but even then we're guessing if that's actually what these fish we chase are seeing with our flies. If 3 different anglers, on the same water, are all having success, and using different patterns, is it really about the pattern? I think that's a good point being made here too. The sum of the whole, not only individual parts to the equation! Not enough folks work on that and when they fail, it's the fly that likely unfairly gets the blame!

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?