The comparison article came out today- here's the link:
Winston Pure vs Sage Trout LL vs Scott G Series - model by model review[/Q
Thank you for posting this link, I went and read the whole comparison. And a conceptually interesting one taking three class completive rod series and matching them by size and line weight. The one thing that confused me overall, and I admit to trying to read between the lines as I know they don't want to write anything negative about any of these individual rods, was their reference to "line speed". They seemed to imply that high line speed, tight loops were somehow counter appropriate to delicate presentation when talking about the 8 1/2'/#4's while one that I know to be a mush tip would lay a fly down more gently...ummm, it is the opposite I do believe. Now I have only cast a few of the rods referenced in this comparison and while I hear them and concur on the 8'4"/#4 GS, I do not on the mostly lackluster Pure (except for the 8'/#4 except the GS is clearly a better design) and, the only T LL I've cast is their loved 9'/#5 which is very nice but in my opinion is NOT a great all-round #5...not for me anyway. I can only hope as I look forward to sampling additional T LL's that they are applying an alternative set of fly rod performance values/opinions, perhaps more freestone biased, than I do for slicker, more technical waters.
I do indeed believe you are spot on as usual S&S. My previous lengthy post, as usual, included some "eluding" to points surrounding reviews and comparisons, and also as usual, was softened. No review should ever be considered Gospel, individuals may have completely different desires and needs than any reviewer.....I was however supporting, like you, that comparisons like this TA version do offer value and although needing to be adjusted for individual preferences and digested knowing they a biased to locally CO fished waters, they are far more valuable for individuals to form a baseline to explore from than vendor biased, sell you a magic rod, dog and pony show reviews.Well, I know that you, cooutlaw, go and cast the individual rods yourself and builld a specialized collection of excellent rods tailored to your habitats. Me too. You also know that when I write about a rod, I am specific in where and how I fished it and what it was optimally suited to do...likely not how versatile it might be.
I do not know the gentlemen at Telluride Anger but I do prefer their approach to Yellowstone Anglers know-it-all competitiveness bracketed by perverse biases. Folks from all over read their reviews though and while I haven't fished the Gunnison in some 35+ years, I don't think the 9'/#5 I might fish there would be different from the one I'd fish in Montana, NY or for that matter Argentine Patagonia.
Every rare once in a while I get to test/fish a new rod that has yet to be reviewed by anyone, sometimes not even released yet. This year it was Taylor's Truth, last year DART in final prototype, pre-released form. Fishing a rod with zero expectations or coloration of potential, all insights being yours alone, is fascinating. Once the rod is professionally reviewed, inevitably you are comparing your impressions against those of the pros.
I believe many of us do not trust our own opinions on many things. We are buying a new mattress (its is mattress sale time now) and while I know a little I am still inclined to take the advise of the professional sales person that sells multiple brands. Do we listen to what our politicians or candidates really are saying or what TV journalists are telling or interpreting for us what they said? Many fly fishers do not believe in or trust their own casting analytic skills and are disproportionally influenced by commercial on-line reviewers. And then, when they spring for the newest and bestest and some one says no, THIS one is the best...they become defensively irritated as their choice has been questioned. I suppose it is the world we live in today.
Classic case of flooded tubes.I got in touch with TA and the article isn’t working on their end either. It hasn’t been deleted and they weren’t aware it wasn’t loading. Should be back up in a day or two. I think it was something to do with water levels, or maybe barometric pressure...