The Traditional Fisherman's Forum

I understand the Avocet to be thicker than the Wizard, but continuing to a full 11 foot and 3 inches. However, post war Wizards are often pretty hefty so it might be that some of them are indeed the same diameter as an Avocet.

Thanks Nobby. Unfortunately, the rod I talk about had been badly restored and all writing removed, before I bought it, so I will never know the make, but the few clues I have suggest I named it well!

I think that all the Allcocks rods with sheet cork handles have a dowel under the cork, certainly my Isis does. I'm fairly sure that the B James rods such as the Avocet don't have a dowel handle, or at least those that are owned by some of my friends don't.

I now suspect my rod might be a post-war Wizard that had it's handle replaced at some point during a restoration, which may explain why Nobby thought it might be a JB Walker avon kit rod. But the mystery remains. Nevertheless, I'm sure it will prove to be nice to fish with, especially with the much longer handle.

Hello new to this forum so hello!
I bought a gold label Super Wizard cheap out of curiosity really as it has 22” cork shiv handle. Did Allcocks ever make a gold label Wizard with a cork shiv handle?
I have had a good look at it and if it’s been modified it’s a good job and I can’t see how it’s been done.
The butt section is the correct length, the whipping looks old and original, the fitting of the ferrule looks original the cane has been rolled to fit the ferrule and some old looking white twine coming out between the ferrule and the cane looks original so I don’t think the cane has been shortened at the ferrule end. The gold label looks to be in the correct position and that can’t be moved, the only thing wrong is the rubber button is missing and the butt cap has been badly glued on with araldite so I can’t get in that end to see if there’s whole cane through to the butt. Have to say the rod feels a lot better with the cork handle.
Any ideas, how has it been done? Could it be original? I don’t know.
All comments welcome
Dave

No

I’m with JOC in this, the Super Wizards heavier lined guides spoil the action for float fishing, but two extra light wire guides help the action and keeping the line off the blank in damp weather, both mine have guides where Allcocks put them, but I built one with more guides, and lighter guides including the three before the tip guide with size 000 guides, and the largest guides only no.2 before an over sized butt guide, ten guides in all. Seemed to work well enough, one of the early brass furniture wizards with a much more ‘steely’ action too.

My Gold label Wizard was refurbished by Wal and in standard trim feels quite unbalanced to trot with, lending credence to the idea that it was designed to fish with the reel below the hand... However one of Wal's 5" screw in butt extenders made a huge difference to the rod, enabling it to be used for trotting comfortably

It does feel quite soft and isn't as steely as I expected it to be (perhaps it had a hard life) but its a good user and who knows... perhaps "they are all like that sir"
For myself its a cracking Perch rod and I live in hopes to land a 3lber on it

The shorter handled cane rods were designed by fly fisherfolk to be held like fly rods, with the reel positioned at the base of the butt. Otherwise they're top heavy and awkward to use.

Nobby wrote: ↑Sat May 09, 2015 8:03 am Might it be that the SW has a 'lighter and through action' because it bends more when you waggle it due to the weight of those lined rings, do you think?

Either that or this just goes to show that no two rods are quite the same, which bearing in mind the organic nature of cane isn't so surprising really.

A very popular rod was the Wizard, copied by everyone, even today, as the Walker Mark IV was later to be, but I never got on with that short handle personally and hence it was always a puzzle to me that it should be so popular when nobody ever fishes it in the Nottingham style it was intended for.

At least you got your carp in and were able to release it....FWK Wallis wrote of taking an hour to 'kill' his 30lb salmon with one, but then I imagine that fish was taken for eating.

I've just come across the extract from the Allcocks Angler's Guide 1935, in which FWKW recounts the landing of his 32lb salmon: