Line pivots
Line pivots, also, don’t seem the most efficient way to travel, especially when tripping!
So, how are Omering and Canadian style different? I always thought they were synonymous, like a tomato, and a tomato pronounced differently.
The reasons
for not paddling from the stern are listed above by others, lack of control of the bow, need for extra weight in the front to stabilize the canoe etc. I drive a 16ft Prospector (a tandem canoe) solo Canadian style, leaning against the bow seat on my knees facing the stern seat. The boat is heeled. I sit adjacent to the gunwale . This gives me excellent position, close to the water for paddling the straights and narrows and tuning. When the wind picks up, I adjust my position towards the center flattening out the canoe which gives me better control. When the wind blows, I migrate towards the centre thwart and away from the bow seat and sit on my haunches.
I use the Canadian stroke for correction and various strokes such as the sweep, draw, one handed pry, inside turn, throw etc for turning. You will see the inadequacies of paddling from the stern once you learn these techniques.
My guess is that you are from the South. Unfortunately, few canoeist paddle Canadian style in your neck of the woods and many are paddling with a double paddle or have migrated to kayaking as they cannot keep a canoe straight, I suggest you find a book or video on paddling a tandem canoe solo. It is worth learning and it is very rewarding.
Did you know that a Prospector (and other canoes with good secondary stability) paddled Canadian style will sail when slicing into the wind?
canadian prejudice?
That sounds like an interesting and possibly efficient style of paddling you have adopted. I’d like to see you in action – are there any videos of you paddling on the internet? Even your terminology suggests a different approach: “I drive a 16ft Prospector” rather than “I paddle a 16ft Prospector.” And your comment about sailing is quite understandable in that context, a most beautiful consequence and something that I now feel an urge to attempt to duplicate.
However, I was a little bit put off by your prejudice against southern paddlers in general and double-blade users in particular. I wasn’t really surprised, I guess, as my own pre-judgments tell me that advanced single-bladers in general and Northerners in particular fail to appreciate the potential benefits of the double-blade. However, it’s pretty rare that I come across someone who thinks the main advantage of a double-blade is that it’s easier to go straight. I would think that someone who appreciated the aesthetics of one type of unorthodoxy would be able to impartially evaluate another unorthodox method.
I won’t bother to repeat the arguments here for when it’s advantageous to use a double-blade. We’ve discussed the topic many times on this board and I’ve made my opinions clear on those threads. However, let me just urge you to keep an open mind on the topic.
In a nutshell
Omering is embellished Canadian Style paddling.
Canadian Style was started back in the early part of the twentieth century as a group activity for canoeists at canoe camp. There were tons of those in Ontario and still are many.
Canadian style is all about precision and little fiddly tweaks of the paddle to do things likes a 360 turn around a buoy with your stern or bow touching all the time. Sometimes lumbering dances were developed, like a canoe touching two others bow and stern like an H and then the whole H rotating while holding the shape.
Omer wanted to have fun… My first canoe instructor was an apprentice to Omers and she demoed what Omering is at my first lesson. I was enchanted…Essentially its making the canoe move in any direction using invisible static placements. The force is generated with paddle angle and momentum.
Its shown in Path of the Paddle…running pries and draws…makes the large tandem rotate all the way around or you can cut it off.
Its the precurson to FreeStyle. Which is nothing more than canoe physics in a way/
Watch Wreckreation Nation on the Discovery channel for that.
Canoeing isnt all about going straight…sometimes there are course corrections to be made and it pays to be able to get your boat exactly where you want it with minimal effort.
To sum it up Omering is big movements in bigger spaces and Canadian Style (Lakewater) is fiddly little paddle manipulations to get the boat within an inch of something. Big dramatic turns are not done.
Omering is lots more fun to watch!
Actually, I don’t buy the sailing idea
– Last Updated: Feb-09-09 11:19 AM EST –
There's often some predjudice along these lines, but sometimes I think it's good to be careful about what experts say too. Regarding the sailing idea, I've been in that exact situation plenty of times and it certainly can feel like you are sailing, but figuring out the forces on paper or using a GPS don't support the idea.
First of all though, if you look at what a sailboat does when tacking at an angle into the wind, the sail that drives the boat needs to be just a little more in-line with the wind (in other words, have a shallower angle of attack) than the centerline of the boat or it won't work. In actual fact, the sail may be cranked-in nearly in-line with the boat, but due to the trailing edge stretching out under the strain, the alignment of the sail remains at a smaller angle to the wind than the axis of the boat itself. It also is necessary for the hull to have very good "lateral grip" on the water for the force on the sail to be translated into forward motion, and canoes side-slip very easily. Drawing out vector diagrams shows why this sail angle relative to the hull is necessary, and why having no sail at all, but just a hull acting as a sail, won't do the trick in this case.
Now, as to why it "feels" like you are sailing upwind, your speed will be significantly greater going at an angle into the wind than straight into the wind, and you can see and feel your boat dancing through the waves at a quicker pace and paddling effort is reduced. That's part of it. The other part is that the wind adds a substantial sideways componant to your direction of travel, which again is quite noticeable, and that by itself adds to your total velocity. Trouble is, that wind-generated drift is not in a direction that really helps you (you are paddling in the wrong direction to take advantage of what the wind is trying to make your boat do). It sure feels like it helps, but out on a lake it's very difficult to percieve your actual direction of travel, and you end up gradually correcting for your sideways drift more and more, the closer you get to the visual reference you've been aiming at on the far shore. This non-helpul drift is much easier to observe in a rowboat, because your actual direction of travel is much easier to see, since you can see a sharp line of turbulence trailing off behind you at an angle to the axis of the boat (the turbulence is caused by the sideways componant to your direction of travel, and it gives you true indication of your direction of travel), and there's no way to watch that happening in a canoe. I suggest that anyone who thinks you are sailing upwind in this situation make use of a GPS to see what's really happening. I've done that, and the GPS readings (actual travel direction relative to boat alignment) were in agreement with my observations of stern turbulence (while rowing) and what a vector analysis suggests should happen.
For some final proof, try this. Align your boat in the direction that you think helps you sail upwind and just hold it at that orientation, and watch what your GPS says about your direction of travel. It won't be even slightly in an upwind direction. It'll be downwind, with a noticeable crosswind componant. The force pushing you in that direction is the same force at work when you are paddling. Things change slightly, as far as the ways in which the boat resists sideways motion when underway, but that's primarily a change in sideways resistance within the rear half of the boat (and it's a reduction in sideways resistance too - not what you need in this case). I don't pretend to understand every detail about this, but I've played around with it enough to be pretty certain of the outcome.
over my head but I kinda see it
This is fast getting over my head, but I’m inclined to think that there will be a bernoulli effect from that setup, and that it’s about 50-50 chance that it will be noticeable.
I wrote and discarded about 2 pages of ruminations, but the bottomline is I just don’t know enough about the theory to say yes or no without trying it.
Eric, you are probably right. You seem to have analyzed it pretty extensively, and you’re usually right when you do that. However, I still can’t quite rule it out.
It comes down to 2 things to me. (1) Is the shape there that will generate a bernoulli effect, and (2) is there a keel that will convert it to forward motion. And I really have to say “yes, kind of” or “yes, in a way” to both questions.
Now, clearly the effect is going to be weaker than it would be for even a small sailboat, and since the size of that force is fairly weak anyway relative to the size of the vessel, it could be that there IS an effect but it’s just so small you don’t notice it. However, by the same token, the force could be big enough to add a knot or two to your speed, under ideal conditions.
Your argument of factors that might mislead one is especially persuasive. However, even if true, that doesn’t rule out the possibility of a real effect. It’s like the paranoia thing (just because you are paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you), just because there is this big source of perception error doesn’t mean that your perception is wrong.
Your idea of a stationary GPS test is a good one. However, after thinking about it, I’m not sure that’s a fair test. Consider the following:
First of all, since you are heading into the wind, a portion of your forward speed would increase the effective wind speed. Second, your effective keel consists not only of the portion of the canoe which is submerged, but also your paddle and possibly the path it travels.
(Note - I’m still thinking about the second point there - it seems to me that an active paddle might provide more effective keel area than the mere surface area of the blade. From a physics standpoint it seems that a stationary paddle in the water held rigid against the side should be an equivalent, but intuitively I want to give credit for how hard I’m paddling and the fact that I’m able to vary the angle of my strokes to “hold” the canoe at a certain angle to the wind.)
Third, (and I’m not sure on this point, just reaching) doesn’t your momentum increase your “lateral grip” on the water? Fourth, there will be a sweet spot with regard to the wind, and if you are trying to get a measurement without paddling forward I don’t know how you could hold the canoe to that sweet spot – it’s going to immediately blow you over and past it. Finally, fifth, (this is a question, I don’t know as I haven’t done much Canadian style paddling) can you heel the canoe as steeply when stationary as you could when moving?
Mind Puzzles and Real Observations
– Last Updated: Feb-09-09 9:48 PM EST –
Well, I'm answering some of your questions mostly because I enjoy trying to figure these sorts of things out. I still don't pretend to know all aspects of this, but I'm working with the things I have some familiarity with, and in a way that makes sense to me.
Topic #1
You say "It comes down to 2 things... (1) Is the shape there that will generate a bernoulli effect, and (2) is there a keel that will convert it to forward motion. And I really have to say “yes, kind of” or “yes, in a way” to both questions."
I'll save your point #2 for later and deal with point #1 here. I assume you are thinking about "lift" generated by the wind passing over the hull from an appropriate angle, and that lift would consist of a force that's applied in a direction which would aid your progress into the wind. Honestly, that's not something I had originally considered, but I'm considering it now, and yes, I think it makes sense that if the downwind side of the canoe were raised to catch the wind, it would generate lift if the wind hit at the appropriate angle. However, as I see it, the best such lift could do is create a force that is aligned at a right-angle to the wind direction, in the same manner as an airplane wing generates lift that is at a right angle to the relative direction of the wind passing over the wing. Well, for the boat hull, there's already plenty of sideways componant to the boat's velocity generated by the wind glancing off the windward side of the boat, but increasing that sideways componant by creating an airfoil shape and generating lift still doesn't do anything to propel you in an upwind direction. Here's why: If there WERE an upwind componant to this lift, in other words, a force pushing the boat into the wind, it would be analogous to an airplane wing generating forward thrust ("helping" to push the airplane against the air resistance it encounters) as a result of being pushed through the air by the engine, in effect, creating a perpetual-motion machine. In actual fact, on an airplane, the generation of lift creates resistance to the engine's forward thrust, and the more lift that is produced, the more engine power is consumed by resulting drag. Of course, the same would be true of a boat hull obtaining lift from the wind. That resistance will "fight" your attempt to paddle forward, or it will push your boat downwind, depending on whether you are paddling forward or just drifting and holding your alignement to the wind. This means that any lift generated by your hull would only compound the wind resistance you are already working aqainst. The bottom line of all these considerations is that the best an airfoil shape and boat-orientation could do for you is to generate a force that is at a right angle to the wind, or in other words, there can be no force pushing you into the wind that is generated by lift alone.
Topic #2
Now, on to your second topic, about the hull providing lateral resistance like a keel, as well as something about wind speed. You said "First of all, since you are heading into the wind, a portion of your forward speed would increase the effective wind speed. Second, your effective keel consists not only of the portion of the canoe which is submerged, but also your paddle and possibly the path it travels.
"(Note - I’m still thinking about the second point there - it seems to me that an active paddle might provide more effective keel area than the mere surface area of the blade. From a physics standpoint it seems that a stationary paddle in the water held rigid against the side should be an equivalent, but intuitively I want to give credit for how hard I’m paddling and the fact that I’m able to vary the angle of my strokes to “hold” the canoe at a certain angle to the wind.)"
Okay, here goes. First, I don't think the increase in relative wind speed is important. At best, you can only go 2 or 3 mph into a brisk wind anyway. Ignoring complete accuracy during addtion (rounding-off the answers) due to the fact that we are not talking about paddling straight into the wind but at a slight angle, would paddling 3 mph and changing the wind passing over the hull from an actual speed of 15 mph to an effective speed of 18 mph be significant? What about increasing a 20-mph wind to a relative speed of 22 mph by paddling forward at 2 mph? How about changing a 25-mph wind to 26 mph by paddling forward at 1 mph. See where I'm going with this? I don't think this aspect matters, especially when experience shows that paddling into a wind becomes increasingly more difficult as wind speed increases. If that were not true, it's back to Topic #1 and the need for a perpetual motion machine to make this system work.
As far as having an effective keel, I'll side-step all your thoughts about using the paddle as a keel for reasons that will be apparent. However, you CAN use a paddle as a keel (they call it a leeboard) if you actually have a sail, but I still maintain that the axis of your sail, or whatever you are using that acts like a sail, must have its axis closer to being in-line with the wind than the lengthwise axis of your boat in order to convert the force of the wind on that sail into forward thrust. The better a keel you have, the more efficient this conversion to forward thrust will be, but without that difference in angle between the sail and hull, you've got nothing to work with in the first place to push you in the "proper" direction. Without that critical difference in angle, the wind can only push you in the "wrong" direction. Because the hull is curved from one end to the other, PART of the raised side of the hull could act like a properly-aligned sail, but this will always be cancelled-out by the hull alignment within the other half of the boat which curves the "wrong" way.
"Third, (and I’m not sure on this point, just reaching) doesn’t your momentum increase your “lateral grip” on the water?"
I don't think so, based on countless hours and miles of rowing and watching my own wake slip off at an angle behind me during any kind of crosswind, but even if it did, we'd have to go back to the main point of Topic #2 and the need for a difference in alignment between the sail and hull to convert the direction of the wind's force to a direction which helps you rather than hinders you.
"Fourth, there will be a sweet spot with regard to the wind, and if you are trying to get a measurement without paddling forward I don’t know how you could hold the canoe to that sweet spot – it’s going to immediately blow you over and past it."
I'm not sure what you mean here. If you mean that maintaining a certain orientation to the wind would be optimum, but you don't believe you could maintain that angle without forward motion, I would say yes you can maintain that angle. If you can pivot your boat in-place while stationary, you can maintain a particular angle to the wind while stationary too, at least until the wind gets too strong for you. In a rowboat it is especially easy to do this, and in really strong winds it's fun to generate very high speeds in a cross-wind, sideways-so-the-hull direction and not actually aiming the boat into the direction of travel, but using this technique to go even directly crosswise to the wind rather than diagonally downwind requires me to provide plenty of my own power in an against-the-wind direction.
"Finally, fifth, (this is a question, I don’t know as I haven’t done much Canadian style paddling) can you heel the canoe as steeply when stationary as you could when moving?"
Yes, you can lean the boat whether moving or stationary (or when spinning, as the canoe-dancers like to do).
I’m not convinced - but thanks
I’m pretty sure that the difference you described is just your interpretation.
The Lakewater course is not the end all/be all of Canadian style, and it does require dock landings and turns. I don’t know anyone who took the lakewater level that cannot do a running bow pry. Most can do a 180 degree turn through just setup and weight shift.
Thanks for sharing your understanding though.
I started paddling Canadian style, but
I learned differently. Possibly this is because with shorter whitewater canoes, Canadian style just does not work very well. But it was quite effective when I was paddling longer boats.
gps test it is then
Okay, based on the responses in the second half of your post and more ruminating on my part, I’m starting to believe that perhaps you could test the effect without forward motion. I’ll do some experimenting this summer, but I’m not sure if my Wildfire is the best choice of boat for it – a wider boat should have a much more pronounced effect, I would think. Plus, I’m still a novice at the Canadian style thing, but I’d welcome an excuse to work on that anyway.
MMC would be a better choice, both for the boat and for the paddler. MMC, are you still around? If so, please take this as a challenge to prove your sailing claim – see the two paragraphs at the bottom of this post.
On the first part, I think I may be correct there, let me see if I can explain this part with my limited knowledge in a way that convinces you. Let’s start with sailboats, which we both agree can sail somewhat into the wind. The Bernoulli principle, which as you say provides lift to shaped wings, also provides the thrust for a sailboat aimed into the wind. The principle says that when air passes around an object shaped so that the air must travel further on one side than the other, there results a force in the direction of the side with the longer path. On a wing, the bottom is flat while the top is curved – the curve is the longer path – thus the force is up. On a sail, the outside is curved, while the inside permits the air to rush straight across, so there is a force toward the curved side of the sail.
However, when you push a sailboat toward the curved side of the sail and the boat starts to lean over, the keel offers you some resistance and thereby converts some of the sideways push into forward motion. Thus, the “lift” or push force on the sail resolves itself into two vectors, one pushing the boat to lean over and the other pushing the boat to move forward. (I get lost here in my vector math, but perhaps you can take it from here. If you resolve these two vectors into a single force, that should be the force you expected, but I’m not sure if it is at a right angle to the wind or in the same direction, or possibly in relation to the sail instead of the wind.)
Anywho, however the science part goes, I think we agree now that a GPS test could answer the question. What exactly should the rules for the test be? I propose a lake with an area that is subject to a steady wind in a steady direction (having a wind meter would be superb so we could measure the wind’s velocity, but we can do without). The paddler can set up at any orientation to the wind he wishes, and then he will take a GPS reading and a wind direction reading. On a hypothetical map, we will plot the position and draw a line through it in the wind’s direction. If the ending position is anywhere forward of that line, it indicates forward progress. If it is anywhere along the line downwind from the initial plot, it indicates no forward progress. (Any other position indicates an error occurred.)
Once in place, the paddler can use his paddle to hold his chosen bearing to the wind but should avoid a preponderance of forward or backward strokes, and he should keep his paddle in the water and held firm as much as possible as well as sitting or kneeling in a stationary position, since his paddle will be acting as a partial keel and part of the sail force (if any exists) will be passing through his body to the boat.
Exactly!
Canadian style was created to answer the question “how does a small solo paddler control a big tandem boat?”
It is not the only style, and is unsuitable for whitewater, flatwater racing, or certain dedicated solo boats.
We used to paddle with a real tiny guy
who ran whitewater in an Old Town Tripper. He was very good if the wind wasn’t up. I think his style could be called, “Frantic Lilliputian.”
One Question, One Clarification
– Last Updated: Feb-10-09 11:36 AM EST –
The Question
What does this mean? "On a hypothetical map, we will plot the position and draw a line through it in the wind’s direction. If the ending position is anywhere forward of that line, it indicates forward progress."
Are you saying the line should be drawn in a direction that is 90 degrees to the wind? That would make sense, as if you can end up on the upwind side of that line, you have made progress against the wind. However, if you are saying to draw the line in-line with the wind, that won't show you anything, because any crosswind componant to your drift will push you across that line, and any boat positioned at any angle to the wind will move crosswise to some extent as it drifts downwind. What you want to prove is that in addition to the crosswind componant you can also move upwind, so "forward progress" in this case must be defined as some degree of travel against the wind.
So, what you need to do is draw the line cross-wise to the wind and see if you can sail your boat to the upwind side. I promise it won't happen (see below) but everyone is welcome to try.
Clarification
I agree completely that a sail can produce lift. The problem is, lift comes at a price, and that price is wind resistance (that's the reason airplanes need engines and it's the principle behind why the theoretical perpetual-motion machine in my last post won't work). Wind resistance can only act in one direction, and that is in the direction that the wind is pushing. THAT is why the axis of the sail and the axis of the boat can NEVER be in the same plane, but clearly describing why that is so would take too long right now (maybe I'll shoot you an email later on). The axis of the sail MUST be oriented at a smaller angle away from the wind direction than the axis of the hull to make the net force on the hull act in some direction other than straight downwind. If you only have a downwind force, you can still steer a course that goes somewhat cross-wise to the wind by adjusting the boat's angle and utilizing the boat's "grip" on the water, but the direction of drift will always be partly downwind (or more accurately, "mostly" downwind). To use wind power to go 90 degrees to the wind or in ANY direction that is upwind of 90 degress to the wind, the sail and boat hull cannot be at the same orientation, and thus the sail and hull cannot be one and the same object (ignoring all the imperfections of "real life" (failure of the hull to properly grip the water, for the most part), you could sail in a direction that is only 1 degree in the downwind direction with a sail that's perfectly lined-up with the axis of the hull, but in real life you'd never even get close to such a crosswind heading before encountering the need to align the sail at a shallower angle than that of the boat). Again, anyone following this thread can certainly try it.
**************************
Okay, I thought of something else. In case my other examples don't explain why you can't use lift to move against the wind, here's a perfect example. There are kites which work just like sails. Imagine flying a kite, and trying to fly it higher and higher by steering it closer and closer to a position straight above your head. It can't be done. Obviously you can't fly the kite straight up overhead and then to a point upwind of you, which is what you could do if the force of lift could be directed in even the slightest bit of an upwind direction. The string of the kite must always resist the force of the wind to make the kite generate lift, and thus that string will always be in tension and will always be oriented at less than 90 degrees to the direction of air flow. Going back to the sail on a boat, this AGAIN relates to the reason the sail and boat cannot be one and the same, but must have orientations that are different from each other (but I'm afraid THIS aspect isn't made any clearer by my latest example, so anyone who didn't get it before won't this time either).
Sailing
The sailing effect is real. I have felt it many times and take advantage of it if the opportunity arises (especially on lakes). In trying to understand it, I too have looked for the possibility of a Bernoulli effect but have not found it. I prefer a resolution of forces approach. The wind hits the windward side of the boat (heeled side) and energy is transferred to the boat. As the rear of the boat is in water as there is weight towards that end (me), little motion is possible in that direction and energy resulting from the wind is transferred to the water. The same for the lee side (paddling side). The remaining energy, If there is any, can only go in the direction of the front of the boat. As there is little resistance from water at that end, the boat is propelled forward.
A couple of points. The canoe has to be continuously paddled for the wind effect to be experienced. This suggests a Bernoulli effect contradicting what I said earlier. The alternative is that the forward effect is small and not sufficient to maintain any forward momentum without paddling . Another point is that the size of the wind effect depends on the angle of tacking. For example, if travel is perpendicular to the wind or too close to the wind, there is no effect. An angle somewhere between these two is where one wants to be. Finding it is not hard.
Bernoulli Effect
– Last Updated: Feb-10-09 1:09 PM EST –
Would you say this Bernoulli effect deals with wind or water passing over the hull. If it's the wind, the need to paddle forward isn't part of the deal. I know exactly the "feel" of the boat that you are talking about, but I maintain it's an illusion. I've discussed other paddling illusions here before, mostly having to do with the effect of current. I believe this is similar, as all my GPS experiements tell me that nothing "real" is happening in spite of what it feels like. I really think the sideslipping of the boat in the wind creates the sensation of extra speed because water IS slapping the boat harder, and adding a sideways componant DOES increase your velocity, but the componant of that velocity in the the direction you wish to go is not enhanced.
If you are talking about a Bernoulli effect due to water passing over the hull, I think that's really nothing more than one componant of the resistance your boat provides against sideways motion. I envision that process as either "lift" or a simple "ramping" action (or both) that will help resist your downwind drift, but since it is totally reliant upon your own power, it's not harnessing the power of the wind but fighting it. In other words, if the wind were not trying to push you sideways, the lift or ramping effect of your hull passing diagonally through the water would be eliminated and your boat would move straight through the water instead of slipping, causing the upwind componant of your velocity to increase (just another way of showing that you are fighting the wind, not using it). That's the difference. Still, I really do know the "feeling" that you describe, but whenever you are dealing with more than one force upon your boat, isolating what is really happening gets tricky.
Funny how Bill Mason used it
– Last Updated: Feb-10-09 2:39 PM EST –
(Canadian style)pretty successfully to negotiate some whitewater.
His books have tons of pix..
Heel does not have to be radical..but note how he drops back a little and is not at the pivot point.
Line picking may be key...certainly his boats were not playboats.
It would not be my personal choice for whiteater though.
e-mailed ya
e-mailed ya
Canadian style
I just want to add a word or two to counter some of the misconceptions of Canadian Style. The degree of leaning (heeling) of the canoe is flexible and determined by knee position in the canoe. Sitting close to the gunwales is great for turning and paddling straight. In windy weather moving the inner knee closer to the centre-line, flattens the canoe and reduces exposure to the wind resulting in better control. This approach is also used for whitewater.
And yes I am promoting Canadian style because fewer paddlers are embracing it. The result is that many elegant and sexy strokes, a few of which I mentioned earlier, are not be known by paddlers today and maybe be lost. A pity! Can you do a 360 degree turn on a dime? I can.
Yes.
often more… and slicing draws and pries while pivoting…well sometimes I get really dizzy.
you are correct in that heel is adjustable.
The lack of CS popularity seems to be due to peoples seats being more developed than their knees.
360+ double-bladed
With a double-bladed paddle, I can do 360 after 360 after 360, probably with much less effort than you (dip left, small stroke back, dip right, small stroke forward, repeat), and then come out if in a burst of speed in a chosen direction when the signal comes.
I actually do this sometimes and it’s not for show but for a purpose. I’ll set yo-yos around the edges of a lake cove or in the bend of a river, then take a central position where I can see all of them. When the fish are biting good I actually do start doing circles, and as soon as I see or hear a fish take the bait, I run off in that direction.
I’m not trying to challenge CS style in general. I’m sure an experienced CS-er can do many things I can’t either double-bladed or single, but when I read that you chose circles to boast about, I just had to speak up. Circles are a natural for a double blade.
And you thought they were only for going straight!
j/k