• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

hooklength length???

Simon Lush said:
I have difficulty working out how a lump of spam can conciously decide to be 'aimless and unproductive' hence it engaging in a spot of 'Flafffing' so i stand by my guns Dave :p

It does however seem an appropriate term to describe the actions of most fishermen ? certainly i have 'flaffed' a bit in my time :D
Click to expand...

You think spam cannot make conscious decisions? Let me assure you that the spam I use consciously and vindictively avoids being eaten by fish at all times...spiteful bloody stuff :mad:

Cheers, Dave :p
 
David Gauntlett said:
You think spam cannot make conscious decisions? Let me assure you that the spam I use consciously and vindictively avoids being eaten by fish at all times...spiteful bloody stuff :mad:

Cheers, Dave :p
Click to expand...

Having spent a good few years fishing in and around the Colne valley i can understand how Spam could be seen as being capable of concious thought and even possibly be a higher form of life :D
 
Trawling through past threads I was looking for thoughts and ideas on hook lengths. I've had success over the years using 6 to 12in hook lengths but then there is this nagging doubt that opportunities could have been missed by fish spooking through line entry detection. In the past I have watched barbel wolfing down all my droppered bait but completely ignoring the hook bait. To resolve this I opted for using a tungsten putty back lead which I felt OK with providing I was fishing off my rod top. I would literally lower my hook length into the desired spot and then walk back up stream to my sitting position confident that my back lead arrangement was keeping my mainline out of the way. I should add that I never over tightened my line in case I would lift the tungsten putty off the deck and have it oscillating in the flow between the river bed and surface completely defeating its purpose, and quite probably creating a greater spook issue.
The above arrangement over distance casts gave me less confidence as I couldn't control what was going on with the back lead, further more having two weights, the back lead and ledger itself tended to cause issues with casting as the two weights would try to compete with each other mid air which would hit the water first.(it's to do with physics I gather). The whole casting operation left me feeling uncomfortable regards tangling let alone what was happening under the water. Casting across the river with this arrangement also raised doubts about the purpose of the back lead. Was it being dragged downstream below the ledger and hook length? Was it laying over or caught up in weed was it, as mentioned earlier being suspended mid water...? I concluded that back leading had its purpose close to the bank where close control downstream ledgering was possible.
How then to prevent line entry spooking when fishing over a greater distance? I read a certain profile angler recommended 3 foot hook lengths as a way to keep line entry away from the hook bait. It seemed a long length to me from what I was accustomed to. I could see the merit in it if, as with the back leaded tungsten the setup could be controlled with everything in line downstream from the rod tip. Fishing some distance across river once again made me question this approach, once the tackle enters the water how can I be sure the 3ft length has successfully unravelled and is lying in a straight line from hook to ledger? Its the not knowing that effects ones confidence. Was my hook bait caught up in some weed or other obstacle adjacent to my ledger rendering bight detection ineffective? Also the greater the hook length the more risk there is of tangling with the ledger mid air or in the initial tumbling through the water before arriving at the river bed. If I were to lift the rod to assist straightening out perhaps the bait would either come off or inadvertently the hook could be snagged. Any thoughts on this please.
 
I think you are suffering from what I call bread flake syndrome Matthew :) Is it still on or not?

I have used hook lengths of 6ft and more with no problems, I have a friend that goes to the extreme with hook lengths using them up to 12ft on the Trent, not something I would do but he has been very successful doing it with more than one fish over 16lbs last season, I have no idea if he caught them because of it or not.

Once you start to have the thoughts that you are having they wont go away until you reel in to check when inevitably everything is ok, my advice would be to stop worrying about these things so much and carry on with your fishing as normal.
 
Spot on Graham. I regularly fish with a mate, the same river, the same day, the same bait, and usually only a few yards apart. He always uses short hook links whilst I prefer 2ft+. Neither has shown to be better than the other.
So in my opinion it is what you feel confident with that matters.
 
Matthew Ransom said:
Trawling through past threads I was looking for thoughts and ideas on hook lengths. I've had success over the years using 6 to 12in hook lengths but then there is this nagging doubt that opportunities could have been missed by fish spooking through line entry detection. In the past I have watched barbel wolfing down all my droppered bait but completely ignoring the hook bait. To resolve this I opted for using a tungsten putty back lead which I felt OK with providing I was fishing off my rod top. I would literally lower my hook length into the desired spot and then walk back up stream to my sitting position confident that my back lead arrangement was keeping my mainline out of the way. I should add that I never over tightened my line in case I would lift the tungsten putty off the deck and have it oscillating in the flow between the river bed and surface completely defeating its purpose, and quite probably creating a greater spook issue.
The above arrangement over distance casts gave me less confidence as I couldn't control what was going on with the back lead, further more having two weights, the back lead and ledger itself tended to cause issues with casting as the two weights would try to compete with each other mid air which would hit the water first.(it's to do with physics I gather). The whole casting operation left me feeling uncomfortable regards tangling let alone what was happening under the water. Casting across the river with this arrangement also raised doubts about the purpose of the back lead. Was it being dragged downstream below the ledger and hook length? Was it laying over or caught up in weed was it, as mentioned earlier being suspended mid water...? I concluded that back leading had its purpose close to the bank where close control downstream ledgering was possible.
How then to prevent line entry spooking when fishing over a greater distance? I read a certain profile angler recommended 3 foot hook lengths as a way to keep line entry away from the hook bait. It seemed a long length to me from what I was accustomed to. I could see the merit in it if, as with the back leaded tungsten the setup could be controlled with everything in line downstream from the rod tip. Fishing some distance across river once again made me question this approach, once the tackle enters the water how can I be sure the 3ft length has successfully unravelled and is lying in a straight line from hook to ledger? Its the not knowing that effects ones confidence. Was my hook bait caught up in some weed or other obstacle adjacent to my ledger rendering bight detection ineffective? Also the greater the hook length the more risk there is of tangling with the ledger mid air or in the initial tumbling through the water before arriving at the river bed. If I were to lift the rod to assist straightening out perhaps the bait would either come off or inadvertently the hook could be snagged. Any thoughts on this please.
Click to expand...

Using a PVA bait stocking attached to the hook tends to keep the line a bit straighter for long casting Matthew.
 
Matthew Ransom said:
Trawling through past threads I was looking for thoughts and ideas on hook lengths. I've had success over the years using 6 to 12in hook lengths but then there is this nagging doubt that opportunities could have been missed by fish spooking through line entry detection. In the past I have watched barbel wolfing down all my droppered bait but completely ignoring the hook bait. To resolve this I opted for using a tungsten putty back lead which I felt OK with providing I was fishing off my rod top. I would literally lower my hook length into the desired spot and then walk back up stream to my sitting position confident that my back lead arrangement was keeping my mainline out of the way. I should add that I never over tightened my line in case I would lift the tungsten putty off the deck and have it oscillating in the flow between the river bed and surface completely defeating its purpose, and quite probably creating a greater spook issue.
The above arrangement over distance casts gave me less confidence as I couldn't control what was going on with the back lead, further more having two weights, the back lead and ledger itself tended to cause issues with casting as the two weights would try to compete with each other mid air which would hit the water first.(it's to do with physics I gather). The whole casting operation left me feeling uncomfortable regards tangling let alone what was happening under the water. Casting across the river with this arrangement also raised doubts about the purpose of the back lead. Was it being dragged downstream below the ledger and hook length? Was it laying over or caught up in weed was it, as mentioned earlier being suspended mid water...? I concluded that back leading had its purpose close to the bank where close control downstream ledgering was possible.
How then to prevent line entry spooking when fishing over a greater distance? I read a certain profile angler recommended 3 foot hook lengths as a way to keep line entry away from the hook bait. It seemed a long length to me from what I was accustomed to. I could see the merit in it if, as with the back leaded tungsten the setup could be controlled with everything in line downstream from the rod tip. Fishing some distance across river once again made me question this approach, once the tackle enters the water how can I be sure the 3ft length has successfully unravelled and is lying in a straight line from hook to ledger? Its the not knowing that effects ones confidence. Was my hook bait caught up in some weed or other obstacle adjacent to my ledger rendering bight detection ineffective? Also the greater the hook length the more risk there is of tangling with the ledger mid air or in the initial tumbling through the water before arriving at the river bed. If I were to lift the rod to assist straightening out perhaps the bait would either come off or inadvertently the hook could be snagged. Any thoughts on this please.
Click to expand...
Any sharp taps from invading chub confirms the rig mechanics are as expected. Any slack between the hookbait and mainlne wouldn't register on the rod top. Where they move your bait to is anyone's guess of course!
 
Decided to give a shorter hooklink a go today as the peg iv been targeting the last month has been a bit of a pain. Fishing in probably 20 foot + deep water iv been getting loads of bites that I can’t hook and also been losing as many to hook pulls as iv been landing. Ended up landing 2 of the 3 bites I had today with both bites being proper slams which on the longer hooklink Iv only had 1 in this swim and that I never hooked either even though it nearly took my rod in.
 
Some interesting thoughts here. I had no idea some people consider 2 foot to be a long hook-length and so may think about shortening up a bit at times from my average of around 3.5 feet, as I do get too many tangles on the cast.

I like the idea of just dropping the rig in and backing off on small rivers and will look more for places where that is possible. I may even prepare some swims next June just to make that more possible. Quite a lot of sawing could be involved (if you know the Nidd you will realise there are no issues with this as anything an individual can do is dwarfed by the sheer amount of willow cover).

I often use a very light back lead - eg a swan shot - to reduce the 'physics' described above (I like the idea that there is anything in fishing that isn't to do with the laws of physics by the way ; -) )and in clear relatively snag-free swims, another flying back lead off the rod tip.
 
Graham Shaw said:
Some interesting thoughts here. I had no idea some people consider 2 foot to be a long hook-length and so may think about shortening up a bit at times from my average of around 3.5 feet, as I do get too many tangles on the cast.

I like the idea of just dropping the rig in and backing off on small rivers and will look more for places where that is possible. I may even prepare some swims next June just to make that more possible. Quite a lot of sawing could be involved (if you know the Nidd you will realise there are no issues with this as anything an individual can do is dwarfed by the sheer amount of willow cover).

I often use a very light back lead - eg a swan shot - to reduce the 'physics' described above (I like the idea that there is anything in fishing that isn't to do with the laws of physics by the way ; -) )and in clear relatively snag-free swims, another flying back lead off the rod tip.
Click to expand...

I can't remember the last time I used a hook link longer than 20 inches. Half that would be my normal one and in winter half that again at times.
 
This gnaws at me a lot when I am fishing, often I think I am fishing too short a length (about 18'') and I am getting tentative pulls without a full on take, I am musing that they are 'backing off the lead', but it is probably just the offering is not to their taste., more than likely had a belly full of natural food. Remember that in such conditions where there is little flow and colour the fish can inspect the hook bait as opposed to in a flow where he who hesitates etc. The answer is possibly to fish as light as you dare/ can, however the thought of losing a fish to a light hook length is just not on.

I saw recently a YouTube offering from the splendid Ginger Fisherman, anyone who is familiar with him will know he is a down to earth Yorkshireman, that catches a lot of Barbel. He does not subscribe to fancy rigs or tackle, his latest piece was Winter Barbel in flood, December actually. His rod was a match rod,(for bite sensitivity) and his end rig was 6lb straight through to a size 10 hook. The 1oz lead was merely stopped with a BB shot a foot or so from the hook.

He baited with pellet mixed with tinned mince MEAT, not mincemeat Ha!

His hook bait was bread flake dipped in the left over meat...the bites were positive and he landed 5 barbel that short session, and a good Chub.
Talk about keeping it simple stupid (KISS) but thinking back when we first started out as kids, you know before Korum this and that, we all did much the same..

Didn't we?
 
There are or will be reasons why you may want to amend your hook link length, over the years I have tried them at all lengths from around two foot to six foot, but now I use a combi at eighteen inches overall to max of two feet including the braid piece [ which is about four inches on average]
My mainline is 20lb Nash Bullit Brown, my combi is again Nash Bullit Brown with 25lb Kryston Gold with the new Gardener size 10 Mugga Dark super sharp hooks with the hair long enough to suit the size of bait being used, Bang zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, fish on.
 
My tuppence worth . If you have the opportunity to watch barbel pick up a bait on the bottom NOT attached to a line / hook , they often , but not always , pick it up and then turn and swim away , usually downstream , they don't often just sit there and consume it . When a barbel picks up a bait with a hook in it they will do the same but will bolt when they feel the resistance/ hook , result the 3 foot twitch we are all used to . I think using long hook lengths is useful to reduce line bites which do spook fish . Shorter hook lengths say a foot are good in flood conditions as it reduces the likelihood of the bait moving / wafting about in the current . I don't think the hooklength length is super critical, you will get bites if it's 6 inch or 6 foot but varying it can help in the circumstances I have outlined above
 
".....they often , but not always , pick it up and then turn and swim away , usually downstream , they don't often just sit there and consume it." .... Agreed, but to add : except when they're pigging out on particles, esp from a feeder. Then they'll pick up a bait (e.g. maggot/caster) and slowly continue upstream, hoovering as they go.
 
Interesting.
And what Terry says is true.

I use 12 to 18" hooklinks as a norm but one Must consider the way any feed is behaving to decide.

Hard filled feeder in fastish water shorter.
Few chopped boilies on a harder water? Longer? And a backlead.

I still get amazed at watching some anglers obviously feeding 100 yards further down the river.
One was firing out maggots over the top of a pushing 6 foot deep Wye swim.

If he had used a 50 foot tail he would have been ok!

Incidently. As a backlead look at ollivettes.
Different weights and slide as required. Work well for me on harder smaller waters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top