HOOKED ON FASHION

Bob Boese -August 10, 2009

In a world where the selection of fly components is often puzzling and strange, there is no instance in which is it more confusing than when it comes to choosing the correct hook.

            Boudreaux went into Thibodeaux’s store to buy a new cast net because Thibodeaux would let him run up a tab even if his credit score was lower than his ACTs. Boudreaux walked over to Thibodeaux’s big Tub-O-Worms and stuck his hands almost to the bottom of the plastic wigglers then rubbed his face because he figured the fish attractant smell worked as good as cologne.
   “Hey Thibodeaux,” he said, “ I’ll be wantin’ a new 10 foot cast net.”
   Thibodeaux looked up from where he was gluing a new tip top on the latest rod to get slammed in his truck door. “Sorry, Boudreaux.  Can’t do dat.  Da wife say we had to modernize so we done gone metric. We only sell tings by dem meters now.”
   Boudreaux scratched his head for a minute then said: “Okay, den I’d like one of dem tree meter cast nets.”
  “Gotcha,” Thibodeaux answered, “Now, will you be wantin’ half-inch or quarter inch mesh?”

            Americans cherish their freedoms and exercise them in curious ways. In the 1970s, an attempt was made to change all U.S. measures to the metric system – which met with a resistance equaling the Revolution. But, because we are open-minded, Americans do allow metric measures, although we still consider them “foreign”. Why Americans have decided to stay with an incredibly confusing measuring system is a matter of our comfort level, but it is hardly logical. Of course, we borrowed it from the English whose system of traditional weights and measures has never been logical.

            Inches came about because in Edward I's reign (1272-1307) the yard, foot and inch were originally defined by granary workers for measuring barley, which was used in beer, which could explain a lot of things. Because of Great Britain’s mixed Celtic, Roman, and Saxon cultural roots, the measuring system that followed the beer man is spectacularly confusing. There are two systems for land measurement (one based on the yard and the other on the rod, which equals 16.5 feet and 40 of which, racing fans, make a furlong, which, in turn, is how long a Scottish field was plowed, but probably not by a nag related to Secretariat) and a third system for distances at sea (a nautical mile is not a “mile” but is 1/60 of a degree or 1 minute of latitude or 6/5ths of a non-nautical mile). If that weren’t bad enough, there are two systems (avoirdupois and troy) for small weights and two more (based on the long and short tons) for large weights. Americans use two systems for volumes: one for dry commodities (cups, bushels, etc.) and one for liquids (gallons and such) and the British use a third (British Imperial Measure) which is entirely too confusing to even ridicule.

All of which, curiously enough, brings us to fashion and fish hooks.

Typical fly hook shapes include at least 16 named varieties, to wit: Carlisle, Aberdeen, Round Bend, O’Shaughnessy, Sproat, Sneck, Limerick, Kendal, Viking, Captain Hamilton, Barleet, Swimming Nymph, Bend Back, Model Perfect, Keel, and finally Kink-shank. Current American hook sizes range in even numbers from 32 to 2 (with the numbering system being bass-ackwards so that 32 is the smallest and the hook size increases as the number designation goes down to 2) , then for some reason America has added a single odd size, a 1, although in England there are odd numbers all through the chart, then sizing jumps over to 1/0 and gets bigger (using odds and evens) up to 20/0. Why is it this way? No one knows. Really. People guess, but no one knows.

            In the fashion world, when designers put their clothing on the runway for review they try to have stick figured models that don’t bulge in places the garment isn’t supposed to show bulges. American measurement would find these six foot tall children (most models are ages 14-20) being a size 0 or 2. Of course, if normal women were on the runway they would mostly be in the size 8 to 12 range. Why did I say American measurement? Because Europeans can’t agree with Americans on anything.  Consider the following:

            Oh, but it doesn’t stop there. There is “traditional” sizing and “modern” sizing, which means the same size, is not the same size. Dress sizes also depend on height and figure type. A junior size corresponds to a height between 5'2" and 5'5" with a slender figure. A miss’s size corresponds to a height between 5'5" and 5'7" with a well proportioned figure. A women's size corresponds to a height between 5'5" and 5'8" and a fuller and rounder figure. Beyond that are “plus” size clothes, which are now called by code words for each manufacturer. The women's sizes do not correspond to bust measurements. A half size is somewhat shorter than a miss’s size and a bit fuller and rounder. A petite size is somewhat shorter than a miss’s size, with heights running from 4'8" to 5'4". The more expensive the dress, the more likely the manufacturer is to label the dress with a size or two smaller than its true size because women who buy those dresses want to be able to say they wear a smaller size. And about bust sizes? Brassiere sizes consist of the band size (a number) and the cup size (a letter). The band size is found by measuring around the rib cage just below the bust line, adding 5, and rounding up to the nearest even number. The cup size is found by measuring along the fullest part of the bust and subtracting the band size. The letters correspond to the result as follows: A (1"), B (2"), C (3"), D (4"), DD (5"), and DDD (6").
Boudreaux walked into a dress shop and told the clerk he wanted to buy a gown for his wife.
"What size?" asked the clerk.
Boudreaux shrugged blankly.
Trying to help, the clerk inquired, "Well then, what are your wife's measurements?"
Boudreaux thought for a moment then said: "Small, medium, and large, in that order."

            Ready to check out shoes? No you’re not, but here we go anyway.

            Okay, okay. But we all know the world of fashion is sort of strange. Not like sensible fishing, right?  Yea....

            Besides basic shapes, hooks have varied shaft length and wire diameter. If the hook is standard, no specific shaft length is designated – so that a #10 hook has a #10 shaft length without anything else being said.  [For the next part here, remember hooks in America, from 2 to 32, use even numbers only.]  But, if you want a longer shaft with the rest of the features of the #10 to be the same, you look for something with an “X long” designation. A “1X long” hook means the shaft is as long as the next hook size up – in this case a #8 shaft length. A “2X long” means the shaft is #6 length, “4X long” means the shaft is two sizes up, a #2 length – 4X being as long as shafts get. The diameter of the wire is explained in the same way using the term “strong” or “thin”. So a #10 hook that is “2X strong” has a wire diameter that is equal to a #6 (3X = #4 and 4X= #2) and a “thin” hook measures in reverse. Strong goes to 4X and thin to 5X.  Easy? Okay repeat that back to me.

Hook eyes are only slightly less complicated. Eyes are either ringed, brazed, tapered, looped, looped tapered, open, flattened, swivel or needle. Seven of these may in turn be up, down or straight. At the same time, points can be needle, curved/rolled-in, hollow, dublin, spear, beak, reversed, mini-barb, kirbed, semi-dropped, ultra, barbless and knife edge and these may be on forged hooks made of various types of wire, nickel, tinned or stainless steel. “Big eye” hooks have eyes equivalent to larger size hooks, but there is absolutely no standard for sizing here. Of course not every variation is available in combination, but if they were there would be over nine (9) million hook style combinations to choose from.

Unless you are in the business, fashion sizing is simply bewildering – but hook sizes can be worse and are often an optical illusion.  Consider the following diagram.  Which hook is a larger size?

Wrong. Both hooks are the same size. Different bend, different manufacturers and optical illusion of the hook eye.  Want to try it again?

Wrong again.  Same size hook, different wire diameter.

And now comes the best part. Assume (always a dangerous thing to do) that you have decided on the hook (and all its characteristics) you want to buy. Well. I hate to tell you but every hook manufacturer has slightly different specifications for their own product so that a Mustad is not equal to a DaiRiki that is not equal to an Eagle Claw, etc. etc. There is NO UNIFORMITY – not in shaft, or wire or bend or makes. It your head hurt doesn’t it?

Mustad is at least making an effort. The new Mustad signature Single Salmon hook series is designed within the Alfa Code system. This means that the gape opening (distance from the hook point to the shank) on a # 2 Salmon hook from this series will have the same gape as a # 2 R50 wet fly hook, or an O'Shaughnessy S71SS # 2 saltwater hook. The same applies for all larger and smaller sizes in the whole Signature hook series. Mustad swears it is not another system to confuse fly tiers, but THE system, based on the original system of sizing used by Mustad for many, many years, made consistent and simple. Orvis’ web site has an entire table dedicated to explaining the uses for each of the fourteen styles of  hooks they sell (look under “fly tying hooks” at orvis.com).  Bass Pro Shops (basspro.com) and Cabela’s (cabelas.com) will tell you what each hook is used for when you click on the picture or text on the fly hooks page.  If you go to the Global Fly Fisher site (http://www.globalflyfisher.com/streamers/raske/hooks/hooks.htm) you will find a table and detailed explanation of the most used streamer fly hooks, or you can just go to the home page (globalflyfisher.com) and put “hooks” in the search window and you’ll get a list of very instructive articles.

My suggestion is simple.  Find a hook you like and stick with it. Experimenting with hooks is like buying a mini-skirt: it looks great on a mannequin,  but when your normally proportioned wife puts it on....
P.S.  There is no correct answer to “Does this make me look fat?”

Comment on this article

Previous Bob Boese Columns