I’ve talked about the wacky jig and the Flick Shake worm from Jackall before, but sometimes it takes awhile to see the full scope of any technique. When I was lucky enough to hook up with Ty Ono several years ago when Jackall was introducing the Flick Shake worm, the tungsten jig heads featured a smaller hook and no weedguard.

When Ono, Curt Arakawa and I hit the old, hard bottom Irvine Lake so I could see the baits in action and learn about the technique, the hook size did not seem to be an issue. And since the Flick Shake worm tended to hold the hook point up, there really weren’t many hang-up issues either. Eventually, to appease that part of market that prefers the bigger hook (and weedguard) for bass, the Jackall wacky jig is now offered that way.

But backing up to my first exposure to the method, it was obvious that Ono used both lighter line (he actually fished with 4-pound test) and a fast tip, but far lighter action rod than one I typically use for dart heads.

But what Ono did, and what I have learned from visitors to this site, other Japanese pros as well tend to use a much higher tempo, or frequency with the shake of their rod tip. It seemed somewhat unnecessary, but with the success of such fishermen as Ono and B.A.S.S. and FLW pro Shinichi Fukae, it (rod manipulation) was certainly worth a look.

But what has hindered my attempts  was the rod. I rarely use a noodle. My spinning rods could be jig rods if they were baitcasters. But I recently got a Lamiglas XPS 764 (7 1/2 feet), and it turned out, the tip action was quicker and lighter than my other sticks, and when I dropped down to 6-pound (straight mono, with a fluoro leader) I found a rod that allows me a quicker rod shake without moving the bait horizontally very much.

When I say quicker, it can be much quicker (like Ono demonstrated) but in fact, in seeing the jig and Flick Shake in clear water, neither are really moving as much as the rod action would indicate. In other words, I get the rhythmic bounce, however, combined with the stretch of the thinner mono, the bait movement is actually more subtle than the bottom-pounding I get with the stiffer rod and heavier line.

I don’t have all the answers. I don’t know that it matters all the time. But I spent hours doing it today and even fish on beds seemed to work harder to get that bait off their nest or kill the darn thing. I couldn’t see them, but I could see the line and feel the mixed bag of nips, tugs and move-offs–all suggesting spawning fish or near spawners.

And one other thing. Whether using the new jig with the bigger hook or the old style that I still carry, it was obvious, even with the lighter rod and line, the there is no problem driving the hook. You really don’t have to swing, the fish have it and that hook on the Jackall is sharp. Just pointing the rod at the fish and reeling was all it took.


10 Responses to “How much (Flick) shake will get the job done?”

I like the Jackall flick worms but have migrated to Zoom swamp crawlers. There a little easier on the wallet if you know what I mean.

Dave: I understand what you’re saying. But we all weigh those things when it comes to something that is working for us.

I fished a night tournament last summer and in less than 30 minutes (using the 6.8 inch Flick Shake)I caught seven bass and used all seven baits (the fish tossed each one) in the bag. My partner was using something else, and I have to say, it would have been very hard to go looking for an “alternative” at that time. 🙂

So, using your description of the rod and action…Would a dropshot specific style rod (Shimano Crucial) work the bait as described?

I think what has become the trend in drop-shot rods would work very well. I prefer longer rods for the casting and wider spool reels for their retrieve speed, but I think your action choice would match up well–especially with the 1/16 and 3/32-ounce wacky jigs.

Here is something for your problem with one bait, one fish George. Get some appropriate sized shrink tube and make a band about 1/4 to 3/8’s long and shrink to the balance point of the worm. It will solve the durability issue with the bait. It is important that the worm be hooked perpendicular so the “o-ring” method will not work. Actually there is a top and bottom to the worm if you try it in a pool.

There are many other baits and tricks involved with this technique. Not going to give everything away on one of my moneymakers. Keep exploring guys. It is a very versatile, and deadly, technique.

Even better idea George, have Jim make you some!

Hey, Robert: I accept all good advice and really appreciate yours. But so you know, in more than 40 years of bass fishing, I never considered catching one fish per one soft plastic as that much of a “problem.” 🙂 I have trashed thousands of worms for not catching a darn thing.

I have to buy mine George. Those things are expensive 🙂
Let me know when I can come dig through the trash.

Is this a bait that one can use an O ring to affix it to the head? I’m using a size 5 O ring to work 4″ Senkos on the Jackall heads and it works like a dream. I can get 5 to 10 fish out of a single bait.

by George Kramer

You sure could on the 6.8 incher since the diameter of the worm is greater. You’d have to see how the 5.8 holds. The 4.8 would require a smaller ring–I think. Haven’t tried it, in all honesty.