Nymphs, a less single sided view.

[AlanB]

Usually when we think of a nymph we think along the lines of the original PTN of a fly with tail, body, thorax and thorax cover. Nymphs haven't always been this way. GEM Skues tied his "in the round". I don't know if this will make much of a difference, but I would like to. To that end I've tied some nymphs in the round. The plan is to fish today's standard tying until I'm having good results, then to change it for one of the ones tied in the round, and note the difference, if there is any.

Here's some of the nymphs I've tied to try this with, along with the standard dressings. With the obvious differences I've tried to keep them as similar as possible.
Nymphs in the round_0001.jpg
Has anyone else tried this? Do you think there will be much, if any, difference?

Cheers,
A.

[ScottP]

Alan

Very nice flies. Charlie Brooks tied many of his nymphs, especially stoneflies, "In the Round". I hate spending a lot of time tying flies that I know stand a good chance ending up snagged on the bottom because that's where the fish are; Brooks' flies are pretty easy to tie and very effective. I'm sure yours will prove to be, too.

Regards,
Scott

[WarrenP]

My opinion, and it is not worth much, but, I feel you will see a marked improvement with those tied in the "round". They are very close to looking like a "flymph" and the "flymph" is a "go-to" for me. I will look forward to your comparison report. I really do think you will see more action from the tied in the "round" due to more "movement" of the material in the current which looks like "food" to the fish. Keep us in the loop.....

[Byron haugh]

Alan,
Brooks actually dove in the river to watch nymphs' actions and then decided that since they were "tumbling " as they became dislodged, there was no " top" or "bottom". Thus, the lack of a wing case on his nymphs.
His primary nymph was the big Western Stonefly on his home waters of the a Madison River.

This is from his book "the Living River " where he compares his pattern (The Montana Stone Nymph) to the big stonefly. Both pretty ugly in my opinion.

[redietz]

I'm very much a fan of "in the round". I've long suspected that the main reason nymphs are tied with an obvious top and bottom has more to do with wishing to be seen as more "scientific" than a wet fly angler; not because they catch more fish. (Not that both don't catch fish.)

[DUB]

Been doing it for years. Sometimes less is more.


Size 22 Bling Baetis:



I consider Flymphs tied in the round. I nymph with them 90% of the time.



Don't forget the Polish Nymphs:

[whatfly]

The topic pops up now and again as tiers discover or rediscover Brooks writings on this side of the pond. My fly box contains patterns that are regular as well as those 'in the round' and sure enough, they both catch fish.

What I never liked about adhering to 'in the round' as dogma, is that there are key triggers built in regular patterns that would be pointless and maybe even counterproductive to replicate 'in the round'. For example, flashback wingcases would become flashy thoraxes (or omitted altogether). While there may be times where they might work, I have often found a little flash can be effective, and a lot of flash can kill a pattern. As with everything else, the philosophy has its place, but there is no single solution to the problem, in my mind.

Postscript: It is often overlooked that many of Brooks' noted stonefly patterns were not tied completely 'in the round'. For example, there's no way you can tie a forked biot tail and have it look the same from all angles. A technicality perhaps, but an illuminating one never the less.