I've just been reading the Teton Tenkara article on swing weights, which shows that the swing weight of Tenkara rods is much larger than that of most conventional rods. Using the balance method, ie placing the grip point of the rod on scales and measuring how much weight you need to apply to the butt of the rod to get balance, Tenkara comes out much worse because the grip point is much closer to the butt, thus needing extra weight to balance it. This implies that you would need more effort to cast with a Tenkara rod than with a rod/reel. This just doesn't fit with my experience, where with even my 13ft Tenkara rod I can cast effortlessly all day. So I believe that swing weight grossly underestimates the effort needed to cast with a rod/reel. Firstly, except for very light rods and reels, casting is from the elbow or shoulder. So the grip point is no longer the fulcrum, but it is the elbow adding an extra ~30cm in length or the shoulder adding an extra 50cm. The weight of the rod, line and reel are all now in front of the fulcrum, needing extra effort to lift it. Tenkara, however, casts with a flick of the wrist so the grip point is still the fulcrum. Secondly, it ignores the weight of the line out of the rod tip. With Tenkara, very light lines are used so the effect is negligible. However, a conventional fly line weighs a few grams, which multiplied by the length from the rod tip to the elbow adds considerable weight (torque). Hence swing weight is a reasonable estimate of the effort required to cast with a Tenkara rod, whereas for a conventional rod it is not.