Marinaro Style Thorax Dun

[Byron haugh]

I didn't have appropriate winging material, but wanted to tie one of these anyway.

To me, the beauty of this style of fly is that it lands correctly, and, I do not like clipping hackle to get a proper float.

Anyway, my feeble attempt at one of Vince's patterns. I know he did not believe in dubbing the body, but I thought I would.

[redietz]

To me, the beauty of this style of fly is that it lands correctly, and, I do not like clipping hackle to get a proper float.

Vince clipped the bottom of his hackles; it's part of what defines a thorax-style tie: wing large and set back further than usual, hackle wound in an X-pattern, and clipped on bottom.

[Byron haugh]

I must beg to differ. Here is a photo of one tied by Marinaro, and you can see the hackle tips.

The current common approach by many tiers is to clip the hackle underneath the fly.

In Mike Valla's book, he recounts an exchange between Eric pepper (who suggested tying the hackle in the normal way (not an X fashion) and clipping the hackle).

Here is how Valla described Marinaro's method: "Additional stability could be obtained by using short-barbed hackles wound on each side of the wing in an X fashion. The shorter barbs, Marinaro believed....."

In regard to Pepper's suggestion of clipping the hackle, Pepper has writen that Marinaro "...still thought it ought to use his hackling method".




If you read the instructions from Marinaro's book, you will note he says to use short barbed hackle........not to clip.

[redietz]

I agree that he doesn't mention it in Ring of the Rise (as you illustrate) except to say that wrapping in the conventional style and then clipping is insufficient -- it's the X-wrapping that's critical (two pages after the one you illustrate.) In A Modern Dry Fly Code he does recommend clipping: "In fact, it is good plan to clip them a little in the fore part if short fibered hackles are not available." Previously in the paragraph he mentions that you would be very fortunate to find hackles with short enough fibers to tie this style. I suppose between the two books better hackle may have become available. I've seen flies (supposedly) tied by Marinaro where the hackles were clipped, and the Code was where I first encountered back in the 60's of clipping a hackle at all.

Anyway, your fly certainly captures the hackling technique nicely.

[Allan]

According to my readings AND the information provided by Mr. Castwell, who learned at the hip, so to speak, of Mr. Marinaro, the hackles were not clipped. Now there may have been some flies that Mr. Marinaro clipped because they didn't come out to his satisfaction . That sometimes happens to us all. However, his design and the vast majority of his flies, and indeed the style, was meant to be tied with the hackle whole.

Allan

[NJTroutbum]

Either way, the shorter hackle x-wound, or a normal length hackle clipped...was to get the entended profile, where the hackle really doesn't extend down past the point of the hook allowing the front of the fly to ride lower in the film.

I have always clipped my bottoms on thorax patterns even with the point of the hook. Not the entire bottom flush, but v-notch the center.

[Steven]

Either way, the shorter hackle x-wound, or a normal length hackle clipped...was to get the entended profile, where the hackle really doesn't extend down past the point of the hook allowing the front of the fly to ride lower in the film.

The assumption here is that the fly actually rides on its tips, which I don't think is any more likely in the Marinaro Thorax style than in the Catskill style. But assuming it does, I've never understood the nose down aspect. What's the point of this exactly? I've never seen a picture of a mayfly nose down.

[Byron haugh]

Red,
I think your quote says "....if short hackled fibers are not available". Not the intended situation at all.

[Joe Billingsley]

This is exactly what I find so interesting about tying. AK Best advocates an "x-wound" hackle style to more accurately simulate legs extending behind and in front of the thorax and to prevent the fly from falling on its nose. I guess what it shows is that we humans really have no idea what makes a fish strike a particular fly and the "experts" adopt a style that they have found successful in their own experience. Fascinating and lots of fun, I think.

Joe

[Byron haugh]

Joe,
I certainly agree it is fun! I really appreciate the contributions of the "Old Masters" like Marinaro. They introduced a bit of science into the "art" of fly tying by observing what the trout sees as an insect/fly comes into their window of vision.
His original thorax style was quite unique and addressed his observation that high wings were important as they were one of the first aspects to enter the trout's window and announce an insect was coming. This required the wings be placed further back on the shank for balance.
He also achieved the "footprint" of the fly he had observed by looking at insects from the trout's position...thus the "legs" coming out at angles from the centerline of the insect/fly.

I think you have to take each pattern in their entirety as well as the type of water each was designed for.

It is what keeps me interested in tying and fishing. Always trying different patterns and trying to improve success on the stream.....