I have been thinking about starting to use back leads, a tactic which i used on stillwaters in my carp fishing days. I am however worried about their effect on
bite indication. Do you think they can have a negative effect? i.e. make a tip/alarm/bobbin less sensitive to subtler bites. If so, can anything be done to
combat this?
backleading and bite indication
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 Goose144 |
backleading and bite indication |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 21 (01/02/08 00:55) |
|
||
 thisisjohn |
|||
|
Posts: 7610 (01/02/08 02:10) |
Goose144,providing your back leads are heavy enough to stop them lifting with water pressure on your line ( ie that bit of a bow we all know unless your using
braid)
if the current lifts them then your going to get a pendulum effect on your line setting in vibrations and line movement ect, but if theyre heavy enough then it shouldnt effect your bite indication much if any if your using running leads....j.w
john walker
|
||
|
Damian Kimmins |
|||
|
Posts: 1737 (01/02/08 06:43) |
For me, when I first started using backleads the bite indication I received changed dramatically. That fact taught me to understand how the indication I get is
also an indication of how the barbel is feeding.
Gone were the quintessential wrap arounds, to be replaced by a much more confident indication; one of lesser haste. A lot of barbel angles assume that the wrap around is a result of a confidently feeding barbel, it isn't. The wrap around is a result of a barbel knowing beforehand that something is suspect, yet is forced to take the bait due to its instinctive traits. The indication that replaced the wrap around I guess was more of a bream bite; the nodding rod top. The reason for this indication was that the barbel didn't realise it was hooked because it never suspected it would be, yet whilst it was hooked, it would still continue to feed on the river bed. In direct answer to your question however, where I fish and the way I fish has meant that fishing with a backlead has never lessened my catch rate, the indication of bites was a great deal more subtle, but never hard to see, but, if you are someone who fishes using more subtler methods, fishing for more pressured fish, then I would say fishing with a backlead would indeed decrease sensitivity. If I was forced to fish this way using a backlead, I would opt for the lightest most free running backlead I could have.
"Whilst developing creativity, also cultivate receptivity.
Retain the mind like that of a child, which flows like running water. When considering any thing, do not lose its opposite." Lao Tzu |
||
|
Phil Adams1 |
|||
|
Posts: 129 (01/02/08 09:31) |
I've been trying this out lately. Started off with Korda flying backleads which are 7 grammes and although it took a while to work out, came to the same
conclusion as John about it lifting and collecting rubbish. Now using 1 ounce and in these conditions, it seems to work fairly well. Had a good success rate in
the last month, and am happy with my rigs. As recommended about a week ago on this site, I bought some Gardner "Hang Gliders" which are an ounce, and
like the Kordas are removable without breaking the line, having a groove in the lead, and in the rubber insert, so lazy anglers like me can remove it and pack
their rods away still made up. Phil
|
||
|
Andy Davies |
|||
|
Posts: 2789 (01/02/08 09:46) |
Damian, "lightest most free running backlead" IMO a slight contradiction - I reckon to reduce friction then heavy and free-running is better - if
the backlead is firmly anchored and has a run ring that would probably be more sensitive.
|
||
|
madasafish |
backleads | ||
|
Posts: 65 (01/02/08 12:36) |
Hi guys, have fished for years, both carp puddles and rivers, and am confused, the current talk ref backleading for barbel is that you use a large back lead to
keep the line down and away from the hook. When I was carp fishing, my backlead would be about 1/2 oz, and would be several feet or further away from the main
lead. and was there purely to anchor the line to the lake bed. Obviously the same cannot be used with river fishing, but why not just turn it round, have the
main weight 4 feet up the main line, with the ''backlead'' 2 feet from the hook. As far as I recall the flow of water is not at the river bed,
and so the smaller weight by the hook-length is just there to pin the line down, and the main weight, is still doing what it is meant to do - stop the flow of
the water on the line. I have seen anglers with 2 x 2oz in-line weights on their lines. Surely this makes it very awkward and difficult to cast, and also very
diffucult to play and land fish too. Many anglers also extoll the virtues of long hook-length to keep the fish from being spooked by weights, and bumping main
lines. If we then look at the reverse back lead as above, then we have the long hook-length, with a small amount of weight to keep the line and hook length
down on the river bed. Even if the ''backlead'' is a small running lead, or a couple of swan shot on a piece of low breaking strength line. Any
thought on this ??
|
||
|
thisisjohn |
|||
|
Posts: 7613 (01/02/08 15:12) |
thats basically what andys saying mate....j.w
john walker
|
||
|
Damian Kimmins |
|||
|
Posts: 1738 (01/02/08 15:17) |
Hi Andy, my thinking behind my post was the thought that past 180degrees a decrease in the degrees of the angle (or increase past the 180) at the point of the backlead would increase the friction. Therefore a line running through a lead at 180' will maintain much less friction than one running through at say 90'. I guess it's a whole other debate to discuss whether or not at this stage of the proceedings, the game is up for the barbel, but that was my thinking behind the post. I am not sure that is easily understandable.
"Whilst developing creativity, also cultivate receptivity.
Retain the mind like that of a child, which flows like running water. When considering any thing, do not lose its opposite." Lao Tzu |
||
|
derek2fisherman |
|||
|
Posts: 406 (01/02/08 16:11) |
hi,i used to use backleads but found they made no difference to my fishing,being that i normally fish close in where i find most of the barbel,the weed will
hide most of the line above the lead,of course there is no casting when fishing very close in,just a gentle lowering of the rig,in fact fishing this way
backleads would be a hinderence.derek.
Last Edited By: derek2fisherman
01/02/08 16:13.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
|
Andy Davies |
|||
|
Posts: 2791 (01/02/08 16:13) |
I think I have it Damian. I guess there are 2 angles though, each of which contribute to friction (and lack of bite-indication) the 2 angles will of course be
different depending on relative weight of main lead and back-lead!
In all honesty I suspect there is little point in using back leads without a "self-hooking" rig and waititng for the wrap-around... Personally have very rarely found cause to use one, preferring to go for 4-5ft mono hooklength when I want to be stealthy, touch legering here is crucial (in conjunction with watching bait better) to avoid deep hooking fish... Andy |
||
|
thisisjohn |
|||
|
Posts: 7614 (01/02/08 17:15) |
Andy, this is when i use a moveable backstop behind my main lead, sometimes tight up to the lead but usually about 6" away, a coupla float stops is
usually enuff to %+**+ a fish, then the wrapover comes
  at least on the rare occasions i catch one ....j.w
|
||
|
rob swindells |
|||
|
Posts: 305 (01/02/08 19:01) |
derek2fisherman wrote: By the very fact of fishing close in I would recomend that this is one of the most critical times to use the backlead to decrease the steeper angle of line
between you and your rig, the weed may also "hide" your line,but for me it's more about touch or feel of the line and barbel spooking from that
rather than sight.
|
||
|
Bait Boat |
|||
|
Posts: 572 (01/02/08 19:15) |
The only time I use a clip on back lead, is in high water/ flood conditions, when I want to have the reel line as close to the bank and out of the current as
possible.
I often use a running Coffin Back Lead, stopped by leger stops somewhere up the line, maybe 5ft above the lead and then the hooklength. The first application is purely there top stopp build up of debris on the line, the second is to pin the line down 4/5ft above the hooklink. I have never had a problem with Back leads, but only use them when fishing downstream. Bob |
||
|
barbuscluelus |
self hooking | ||
|
Posts: 2 (01/02/08 19:57) |
"In all honesty I suspect there is little point in using back leads without a "self-hooking" rig and waititng for the wrap-around... "
Andy could I just ask if you think that the reverse backlead approach that you described earlier would be an effecient self hooking rig and perhaps what ways it could be improved. Thanks James |
||
|
Andy Davies |
|||
|
Posts: 2793 (01/02/08 20:34) |
James, was kind of hoping the discussion would bend that way - cant speak from loads of experience, more just thinking about it - I do often use long
hooklengths, and most of the time the bites are wrap-arounds, due to the hooklength being fairly straight and alined with the flow and the barbs turning
downstream on picking the bait up, but I think you need to use the right presentation at the business end to ensure each fish is pr1cked (cant recall how good
our profanity filter is
) For me this means a curved shank hook, stiff hair, and a hinge 1cm above the hook (Mantis Gold usually with fluoro/mono above as a
combi when using longer hooklengths)
Using the reverse backlead approach the above would still be true, but I think you could get better results by using just enough lead to hook the fish on the bottom weight, and 2-3 times more weight on the above one. I havent really had that much cause the experiment, as a standard long hooklength has been enough for me so far - pesky chub can be a problem at times. Fully intend to spend next summer trying to stalk fish rather than waiting till dusk - time for lots of experiments I think! JW - The 'shocker rig' with the Float stops is my standard choice, but sometimes the efficiency of a more firmly attached lead or even inline (dont like doing so) is needed for spooky fish. Only recently I had a few early fish in a particular spot, then the cagey indications started - off with the float stops, swapped to a safety clip and reduced hooklength to 5" and the next 3 were wraps
Andy |
||
|
derek2fisherman |
|||
|
Posts: 407 (01/02/08 20:42) |
hi,a good point rob,so i will try to explain what i do as i should have mentioned this.firstly my rods are very low to the ground with the tips almost touching
the water,but the most important thing[for me anyway]is while i have been watching the barbel feed or they are just in an area they like[sandy or gravel
bottom]i watch where they come from, to come into the area, and also which way they leave the area so in reality where the line enters the water is not
anywhere near the hot area.derek.
|
||
|
barbuscluelus |
|||
|
Posts: 5 (01/02/08 21:11) |
Hi Andy thanks for the reply, I've been contemplating the stiff hair for a while now, how do you go about setting it up, do you leave the coating on the
braid then put a break in the coating 1cm above to hook to create the hinge or do you whip on some stiff mono? I'm starting to get my head round this rig
now the first lead does the pricking then the last lead provides the self hooking bit, with the smaller lead giving a downward angle for the hook, which would
work in a similar way to a bolt rig with a short hooklink, I assume you would semifix the first smaller lead ? James
|
||
|
rob swindells |
|||
|
Posts: 306 (01/02/08 21:48) |
Hi Derek
For my close in work I do as you with my rod tip touching the surface of the river,also as you if I can place rather than cast into the swim then I will do so(using the heaveyer backlead set up)once the rig is in place I walk and backwind my way upstream far enough away from the hot zone, this in turn keeps disturbance down near the swim and also puts my mainline at a better angle. Even with longer hooklinks and as you describe "line enters the water is not anywhere near the hot area" there for me is still the need for the backlead, my main reason amongst others is "Egging" where by the Barbel are searching out the "hot area" and drift around in the swim in a sort of egg type shape from the bottom to the sides, top of the swim and back down to the bottom, almost as if actively searching the swim for line by either sight but for me more than likey by touch/feel. |
||
|
thisisjohn |
|||
|
Posts: 7616 (02/02/08 02:58) |
This thread is becoming interesting now with various bits being revealed and discussed ect,
some will wonder how with a lighter end lead can you cast out without getting tangled because the backlead thats much heavier tries to lead the lighter end lead on casting thus having the hooklink being dragged up the line when in flight, this i overcome by using webtube with freebies attached to the weight rather than the hook! then just nick the hook in the webbing too, this will give you a heavier end weight for casting now ( ie heavier than the back lead), same result can be got through moulding some groundbait around the end lead and pushing the hook into the ground bait.....j.w |
||
|
Bait Boat |
|||
|
Posts: 573 (02/02/08 09:39) |
I dont get it ?
The only use for a back lead has to be in conjunction with a bolt rig set up, other wise if you were touch legering the only thing you would feel is the weight of the back lead. With a bolt rig set up what would be the point in having a lighter lead at the business end ? As for most of the time the rig end would be out in the current holding position, which might require a considerable amount of lead. The length of the hooklink does not matter, its the weight above it that matters, by holding it in position . The bolt effects the same, be it a heavy or light lead, the crucial thing is the weight of the back lead and its ability to hold down the line. Be it for disguising line before the hooklink or keeping the reel line firmly on the bottom to reduce the amount of debris building up on the line in flood conditions. Bob
Last Edited By: Bait Boat
02/02/08 09:42.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
|
derek2fisherman |
|||
|
Posts: 408 (02/02/08 13:06) |
hi all,hope you dont mind but i would just like to tell you what the conditions where the day i caught that big chub,ime sure you read the article i put up
last season,when i missread the scales,but in some way it is connected to this thread.last august while i was having a look round on a very warm and clear
day,i hadnt seen any fish due to the river being chock a block with streamer weed,from one side of the bank to the other,as the river board had not done any
cutting on the stretch i was fishing.
however i did notice a very narrow channel on the far bank in one area that looked as though it was mainly clear of weed,the only thing was,it meant having the rod sky high to clear the weed between my fishing position and the narrow channel on the far bank,i didnt like the choice one bit,but i had to fish somewhere,hence there was nobody else fishing near me.so this is what i did.i cast into the channel just off the edge of the weed where it ended,and saw the rig drop into the channel,but instead of putting the rods high,i put them low to the ground as i normally do but with the tip of the rod just underneath the water. now,there was no chance of the line laying flat on the bottom,but i knew the rig would be.so i ended up with the line from the rig under water but laying on the weed that was under the water.in effect the tight line pulled the surface weed under the water. it looked ridiculas to be honest,and i didnt think i would have a hope in hell chance,until about 40minutes later i had a screaming run,that resulted in the biggest chub i have ever seen and caught.i did have another belting run that day,and hooked another good fish,but sadly it was only on for about 4seconds before the the hook pulled out. |
||
- BFW Barbel Talk
- BFW River Reports
- BFW Other Species Fishing board
- BFW Social board
- BFW Barbel basics
- BFW Members
- BFW Swim Analysis
- Technical help
- Barbel and Fishing Classified
- Miscellaneous Classified
- Archive 1
- Archive 2
- Archive 3
- Archive 4
- Archive 5
- Archive 6
- Archive 7
- Archive 8
- Archive 9
- Archive 10
- Archive 11
- Archive 12
- Archive 13
- Archive 14
- Archive 15
- Archive 16
- Archive 17
- Archive 28
- Archive 29
- Archive 30
- Archive 31
- Archive 32
- Archive 33
- Archive 34
- Archive 35
- Archive 36
- Archive 37
- Archive 38
- Archive 39
- Archive 40
- Archive 41
- Archive 42
- Archive 43
- Archive 44
- Archive 45
- Archive 46
- FAQ topics
- 2001 to 2002 Season River Reports
- 2002 to 2003 Season River Reports
- 2003 to 2004 Season River Reports
- 2004 to 2005 Season River Reports
- 2005 to 2006 Season River Reports
- 2006 to 2007 Season River Reports
- 2007 to 2008 Season River Reports
- Moderators area
- Admin
Quick Reply
