pooter

Yeah, sure, I'm a troll because of your frustrations. How old are you (S)onny? Grow up. Adios carp.com. When you can't handle opposing ideas you fail to grasp any concept of debate.

Thank you greekski but I have been at pains to point out that yes, some follow fashion, but I didn't get personal to any on here. If some do however get offended that's their choice,what can I do about it if they want to insist that I'm using them as examples apart from stating that It's not personal, which I have done. I posted bluntly yes, but come on, some get offended, or look to get offended at the drop of a hat. I haven't called or inferred anyone here is a sheep but people chose to take offence, in unnecessary defence. Whatever. If you were to go back and read my first post on this subject I referred to nobody and nothing on this forum so why folks thought it was a personal attack beats me. A bit of robust talk never hurt anyone. Until now it seems.

Do what we do and keep quiet, is that censorship? I'm not going to attempt convincing those who have convinced themselves they know everything . They don't. It's as simple as that. The wheel has been invented,I don't believe anything will change angling as the hair rig did. But,I'm not closed of mind either,however without due process it's easy to just say it happened because I did this but without really knowing why. I think some folks are too sensitive, I'm not trying to wind people up but they are apparently.

I would have thought it was all and only about separation. Originally,in my world ,the hair was 2lb line tied to the hook bend and a BB shot pinched on to mould the paste around. Then it all went pick and mix. Now,I see the God of Hearn showing his bottom bait rig with a knotless knot and the hair pinned to the hook bend as per the original . What,30 plus years later it turns full circle. What's a chod rig if it isn't effectively a side hooked boilie in new clothes?

And at last a rational response from Ian. Yonny, I'm not looking for a row but knowledge on people's reasons for doing something. You appear to be the one who's angry,I'm not in the slightest. In any debate it's critical to explain your points clearly,I'm putting questions in,looking for an understanding. I've already stated I wasn't having a personal dig at you,I'd ask you to believe me but it's your choice. I would still maintain that many follow blindly and as has been pointed out nobody has run a controlled experiment so neither yourself or any other can unequivocally state this rig will do exactly as described or will work better over others.

If you don't know why you're doing something is that supposed to be an intelligent response? Something you don't get the gist of come to that. Don't give me insults, explain your rationale, I've twisted nothing. A bit like this version of the spinner rig wont twist when silt gets in the works, making it a static rig. Perhaps the most honest and upfront answer to this would be the users just admitting they have no idea how or why it works but they have caught fish using it purely on the basis that someone has publicised it and said " hey guys, try this" or some such. Forums are about debate, if a newbie offends you with their questions perhaps you could make this place invite only, bit like a syndicate. Catches prove the rigs works, what they don't prove is that only this rig would work in that certain situation,no?

Yony If my valid questions wind you up then yes,best you leave if you're unwilling to answer. All I'm asking is why do you justify this rig and when,where it works. It's only Information after all.

If you don't know if it works why did you start using it? As an experiment? What were the controls in place if so? Doing something without reason, not knowing how or why or if it works or when it's best applied is the action of someone who hasn't bothered to work things out for themselves but just copies what others do,ergo, sheep. This is not a personal dig. Surely fine chod (WTF is chod anyway? *) and silt could only impede the movement of a swivel via ingress? * Yeah, I know what it refers too, but "Tel" used it first so now everybody does. BTW, Frank Warwick used the 'chod' rig ages before it became popular AKA, sheeptastic scenarios.

I'd like to ask all you aficionados just what are the circumstances present that actually require this particular set up. What are the criteria?

1) Just because it's incorporated doesn't mean it works,have YOU actually seen it work and confidentially state that it succeeds because it's present and what test criteria did you use,what was the control,what alternatives were used alongside? 2) Sharman wrote this in a BCSG article ,certainly within the last 10 years,most probably much more recently. 3) So all previous rigs are now defunct because the latest all singing collection of ironmongery is now de rigeuer? Fella.

I never asked anyone to use the rig I described but if it was good enough for George Sharman I'd say it could well work. What about all the other previous rigs that didn't swivel all over the place but still landed fish, would that be in spite of or because of?

Do you know for a fact that the hook does swivel at all? Just because a swivel is incorporated should that be a given that it will spin freely under next to zero tension? In other words ,has anyone ever tested this rig and actually seen the hook swivel round, I just have my doubts that this ever happens . I may well be completely wrong.

Then tie a loop at the hook end of the boom and use a long shank hook. Done. No fancy names,no carpforum sheep baa'hing. No need. Rig 'o' mortis prevails, pIgeonhole everything, follow the leader. I thought the KD rig was the be all and end all or am I too last year?

I appreciate your response but I'm after a normal chair for sitting on during the day and the usual stuff we do inbetween takes.