Graphite has so taken over the fishing rod market that plain fiberglass rods often are thought of as inferior. Regarding price, they usually are, but in many other ways they are only different.

The functional difference between graphite and fiberglass is the inherent resilience, or springiness of the two materials. Graphite is the faster-acting stuff, loading, unloading, and returning to a neutral position faster and with less wobbling than fiberglass. For fly casting, in particular, that's good because the more and greater wobbles a rod takes before it returns to neutral, the more s-curves it throws into the line.

Graphite also can be thought of as more powerful, delivering more snap with the same amount of effort. So it casts farther, all else being equal. But most of us do not cast flies all of the time, and most of our casts are not to the limits of our capabilities- physical or equipment-wise. Which brings us back to why it may be time to add some old-fashioned fiberglass to our arsenal.

There are many factors that must be combined to achieve pinpoint casting accuracy, but after the casting stroke has been grooved, the critical element is the timing of the release. So even for those among you (not me) who are not getting old enough to notice some diminution of your reflexes, fiberglass might improve your casting accuracy because it is slower than graphite. Thus there is a greater span of time between the loading of the rod and the point at which the cast is released.

The longer that timespan, the wider the window of release for a cast that will land where we want it. To the caster, the advantage is much the same as that of the wing-shooter choosing between a 12-gauge shotgun and, for the sake of comparison, a .22 rifle. The timing of the release is not so critical with the shotgun or the glass rod, as it is with the graphite or the rifle. Advantage: fiberglass.

Taking that advantage to the limit, consider that solid fiberglass-possibly available in casting actions under the Snoopy brand, or in Grandpa's attic-is several factors slower than hollow glass. It's also heavy enough to make it unattractive in any case, but it's worth noting that at least one trick caster has made a career casting accurately with a solid glass rod none of us would really want to fish.

For livebait anglers, the "softness" of the fiberglass action offers yet another advantage. Delicate baits-say live herrings hooked through the soft tissue under the bridge of the nose-have a tendency to sail into the wild blue yonder, without a hook, when cast with the velocity imparted by a graphite rod. That sudden snap is hard on a shiner's nose.

Fiberglass, on the other hand, is much kinder and gentler, catapulting clupeids without calamity, time and again. As for distance, the aerodynamics of the shiner almost negate any advantage graphite would have with a more ballistic bait. Borrowing again from another sport, we know that Mark McGwire cannot whack Whiffle Balls significantly farther than the average Little Leaguer. Thus the shiner flinger with the fiberglass rod can cast pretty much as far as the guy (or gal) with graphite.

I digress, but my late, great friend Scott Weisenberger showed me how to add a good 10 to 15 percent to shiner casts by belly hooking the baits, and thus creating a weight-forward configuration.

In any case, let's say we've found a case for fiberglass in at least one situation-casting soft, natural baits at redfish tailing in tall grass, where they are likely to smell or hear a bait cast to within inches of their nose, even if they can't see it.

Some bass anglers also like the softer fiberglass action when fishing crankbaits, because they say they lose fewer fish during the fight; the softer action of the rod prevents them from jerking the lure out of the fish's mouth.

But what about the fish-fighting tradeoff? Because it feels stiffer, many of us have come to believe-as many rod manufacturers have led us-that graphite is the more powerful fish-fighting tool. Indeed it is, if we use the entire rod to pull on a fish, although that is the hard way to do it. In fact, the more of the rod we put into the fight, ultimately creating a 'C' shape at maximum strain, the more we reduce pressure on the fish, after a point.

That is not how the strain feels to the angler, because rods are third-class levers, which means the advantage they provide is to the fish. But rod efficiency can be demonstrated with a spring scale tied to the fishing line. Start with a tight line and the rod pointed at the scale, while not allowing the drag to slip. As we begin pulling we soon reach the maximum amount of pressure we can put on a fish with a given rod. That pressure will be exerted when the rod butt is angled at about 30 to 40 degrees to the scale, and about two-thirds of the rod still is pointed straight at it. Beyond that point, and the more the forward two-thirds of the rod is brought into play, there actually is a decrease in tension on the scale. When the rod butt is at a right angle (90 degrees) to the scale, most casting rods will exert only a little more than half the pressure that can be derived by pulling more directly with the butt.

So it is that when it comes to putting pressure on a fish, what matters is the stiffness of the butt section of the rod. That means that between graphite and fiberglass there is no functional difference-the butts of either are stiff enough to maximize the effectiveness of the line within given line-strength classes. What matters most is not the rod material, but the technique used in the rod's deployment.

For some pointers on getting the most out of a rod, try to catch famed angler Marsha Bierman on tape or at a boat show, where she may be happy to demonstrate the technique that has helped her catch grander marlin and giant bluefin tuna on mere 50-pound standup tackle. Bierman uses a very compact pumping stroke that maximizes the pressure on the fish and the number of strokes per minute, while minimizing the strain on herself. She rarely fights even 1,000-pound marlin for as long as 30 minutes before she brings them to her knees.

Back on task, we may find a paucity of actual fiberglass rods from which to choose, due to graphite's dominance in the marketplace. The good news is, fiberglass usually is cheaper than graphite, which may be why manufacturers prefer to sell the latter.

A compromise, but not a bad one, is the popularly priced "composite" rod, which usually means it has a token amount of graphite in a primarily fiberglass wall, the bulk of which is resin in any case.

Some companies actually make specialty fiberglass rods, like Daiwa's V.I.P. Saltwater Series, which is promoted "specifically for the unique needs of Southern California and Baja saltwater fishing." Those needs would be the ability to flip live baits to tunas and wahoo, and then have the wherewithal to contain nuclear reactions. As if an angler pitching shiners to snook under docks couldn't benefit from the same tools.

All of which is not to say that either graphite or fiberglass is superior material. It is to say, borrowing from the French, viva la difference!