I agree with pretty much what's been said. I think the important part of flymph construction is the fact that the based material, whether it be wire or silk or nylon, is that it shows thru the dubbing.
Regarding the Leisenring Lift, according to Hughes, it was done in a shallow area of water, allowing the fly to get deeper. Heavier hooks, as Hans has noted, as well as the addition of a little wire. Helps to do this. You must remember that Leisenring was a wet fly man for the most part. In those days, silk lines were used, probably left un-treated, which helped tremendously to get the fly deeper in the water. With all the new floating lines flying around, we often neglect a sink-tip or full sinking line. Giving the fly ample time to sink before activation-which amounted to stopping progress-using heavier hooks and sinking fly lines assisted Leisenring in getting the fly deep enough to simulate the emergence of a hatching insect.
William,
Sawyer's method was, if I'm not mistaken, an upstream induced take done by casting ahead of the trout with a weighted nymph, and lifting the rod tip at the right moment. My take with Leisenring is the progress of the drifting fly was halted by simply stopping the following of the fly's progress downstream. This also activated the fly, making it rise in the current. I may be wrong on this since my brain is still suffering from chemo fog.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Mark