Knot

Bends

[Added 12/14/97] This knot is a sort of compromise between the Double Harness Bend [Ashley 1421] and the Barrel Knot [Ashley 1413], though I find it easier to untie than either. Others may disagree, however. I developed it mainly to satisfy my (perhaps irrational) preference for what Ashley calls "cruciform" bends, bends from which the bitter ends emerge at opposing right angles.

[Added 12/22/97] Although the first graphic above gives a (slightly) better idea of the shape of the knot, it can actually be drawn with fewer crossings (10 vs. 12) as in the second illustration.

[Added 3/13/98] This version, although it has even more crossings (14), gives a very good idea of the final shape of the knot, and of its attractive appearance.

[Added 12/30/97] To point out some other relatives of this knot: it bears a certain resemblance to the Surgeon's Knot [Ashley 1209], but the knot it actually resembles most closely is Ashley 1450, which Ashley developed as a hawser bend; the above is essentially a symmetrical version of that knot.

[Added 1/13/98] Though I realize that it may turn out that this knot is not original to me, in the meantime, to have a more convenient method of referring to it I tentatively dub it the "Basketweave Bend", because of the appearance of the back face of the knot. It, too, can be tied (in loop form) to a ring without first knotting the rope (see below). Perhaps I'll add a graphic showing the method for that.

[Added 1/26/98] If loosened sufficiently, then capsized by pulling on the bitter ends, Basketweave transforms into Ashley 1451, another excellent bend related to the Full Carrick.

[Added 3/2/98] I was told a week or two ago that Basketweave is described in the latest issue of Knotting Matters, which (shame on me) I don't get since I haven't joined the IGKT yet.

[Added 3/16/98] There are essentially two ways to generalize this knot if the resulting bend is to remain symmetrical. If one thinks of the tying method as twisting the ends together twice as for a Surgeon's Knot, then tucking the ends (this can be best seen from the topmost illustration), one can increase the number of twists and then either:

1. tuck the ends at the center still, which preserves the basketweave appearance but makes the knot much more difficult to undo, or
2. tuck the ends at the same distance from the ends (as if finishing a sheet bend), which preserves the liftable loops at the ends of the knot which make the original Basketweave so easy to untie. The result is shown below, with the number of twists increased to three. (Four or more seems to be overkill, in my estimation. Perhaps in fishing line they might be needed--haven't tried it yet.) As the knot is tightened the added twist transfers itself to the outside of the knot, which results in less basketweaviness, but also an attractive corkscrew appearance.

I believe this knot to be nearly as secure as the Barrel Knot, slightly bulkier, but much easier to untie.

[Added 3/21/98] This shows the Double Basketweave Bend after the twist has been transferred to the outside.

[Added 3/27/98] This shows option 1 above, which I think of as the "Barrel-Weave" bend, as it shares characteristics of both the Basketweave Bend and the Barrel Knot. It seems to work well even with four twists, although here it is only drawn with three.

[Added 4/9/98] I have received the following from Brian A. Glennon, rigger:

In reference to you new knot, the "Basket Weave Bend", I believe you have re-discovered the SENNIT BEND first developed by two mountain climbing enthusiasts: C.E.I. Wright and J.E. Magowan in 1928 and a current diagram of this bend may be found in the book: 'The History and Science of Knots' by Turner & Van de Griend (1996) page 159.

[Knot posted 10/26/97] This knot, which I (briefly) believed original (see below), bears the same relationship to Hunter's Bend as Ashley 1452 (Ashley's Bend) does to Ashley 1408 (note: not Ashley 1409!), i.e. similar in structure (and therefore in method of tying), but with the direction of the final tuck of the ends through the central nip of the knot reversed, which makes it more easily untied.¹ Hunter's Bend is depicted below.

Another way of thinking about this knot, or rather the relationship between this one and Hunter's Bend, is that each is formed by taking one of the differing sides of a Lineman's Loop (Ashley 1043) and duplicating it symmetrically.

¹[Added 10/30/97] To amplify on this comment: this depends partly on how the knot is drawn up. If it is tightened primarily with tension on the standing parts, the knot is very easily untied by pulling on the outer loops, though still not as easily as Ashley's Bend with its "unwinding" action. If drawn up firmly by the bitter ends as well as the standing parts, it assumes a shape whose cross-section is smaller than that of Hunter's Bend (which might be advantageous in certain conditions) but becomes more difficult to untie than before.

[Added 11/23/97] Yet another way of thinking about this knot: it is quite similar to a Full Carrick Bend With Diagonal Pull, Capsized (Ashley 1439). The two knots differ only by two crossings, as can be seen by comparing the above graphic with the Carrick Bend, below:

[Added 3/19/98] An aside about the Carrick Bend: by following this diagram (or the one below for the Carrick Loop(s)) one can tie the Carrick Bend "pre-capsized", which might be preferable to the usual method of tying it as two overlapping loops, then capsizing it by pulling on the standing parts. If not sufficiently loose, the knot fails to capsize completely, and the intermediate form is not as strong as when completely capsized, which is according to Ashley "one of the strongest of bends".

[Added 12/10/97] Yet another way of thinking about this knot: it is quite similar to Ashley 1453, an asymmetrical but easily untied bend. The two knots differ only in the way one end is tucked. I'll add a graphic illustrating this as soon as I get the time.

[Added 12/11/97] As promised, here is the new graphic: just tuck the upper end as indicated by the arrow, and "my" bend is converted to Ashley 1453. A slight correction to the above paragraph: although it appears asymmetrical when tied this way, or for that matter by following Ashley's diagrams, Ashley 1453 can be manipulated into a symmetrical form.

[Added 12/22/97] It turns out that this knot is pretty new, but it is not original to me. Robert M. Wolfe first brought it to the attention of the knotting community in 1996. He has dubbed it the "Chicago" bend, or simply the "C-bend".

Darn.

Loops

[Added 12/22/97] Here is my latest idea: The Angler's Loop [Ashley 1035] is strong, secure, and easily tied, even in the bight. Its only disadvantage is that it is difficult to untie. Why not therefore add a twist so that its "core" (highlighted in yellow) is a figure-eight instead of an overhand knot? This makes it easier to untie. The original Angler's Loop is below on the right, my proposed variant on the left. It remains to be seen, however, whether there is any reason to prefer this variant when one could use Ashley 1043 (the second graphic), which has essentially the same virtues and is even easier to untie. Ashley 1043 is more lopsided, but the lines running together around the top make it more attractive, at least to my eye. The greater lopsidedness may make it weaker, but I have yet to test that hypothesis.

[Added 01/11/98] One disadvantage of the above loops (and other popular loops such as the figure-eight loop) is that if they are used as hitches to a ring or other such object, they require one to tie an overhand knot or figure-eight in the rope before reeving the end through the ring, unlike the dependable old bowline, which does not. Of course one is not supposed to depend on a bowline anymore in these days of synthetic line, so I began experimenting with tying the Carrick Bend as a loop knot. (I know about the double bowline, but that's too easy. Quit spoiling my fun. 8-)> )

In the following diagram, option 1, in yellow, yields a straightforward Carrick loop. Option 2, in cyan, is a variation which should be more secure, but may be slightly less strong. It is sort of half Carrick, half Chicago. Option 3 (green) might be a reasonable compromise between the previous two in strength and security. (Note: these strength and security rankings are guesses based on the geometry of the knots; I need to get going on my stress tests.)

[Added 3/19/98] I still haven't done rigorous stress testing, but I must admit that of these three variants I am most fond of option 2.

Binder Knots

[Added 12/30/97] A thought about binder knots: Ashley neglects to point out that the Constrictor With an Extra Turn [Ashley 1252] can also be tied in the bight; his method of tying the Constrictor by taking a round turn, lengthening a bight, and lifting it over with a twist (described at Ashley 1188) produces it, if one starts with a clove hitch instead of a round turn.

Ashley 1201 can also be tied in the bight, at least in principle (when lifted off the post, it capsizes to nothing without access to the ends), but puzzling out the exact method eludes me so far and may not be worth the trouble. As Ashley says, it is rather ponderous.

[Added 3/2/98] I've discovered the method, after some time away from this subject. Diagrams will follow as soon as I get the time.

[Added 3/3/98] Here we go. First throw two bights of opposite handedness:

Lap one over the other:

Twist the combined loops into a figure eight, and insert whatever the knot is to be tied around as shown by the arrow.

Finally, tighten and adjust to smooth out the extra crossings.

This knot is very similar to a recently discovered knot called the Boa knot; in fact, if the bight on the left in step one, above, were of the opposite handedness, a Boa knot would result. However, as best I can tell the Boa knot is inferior to this one; it is harder to draw up, no more secure (possibly less so), and less attractive in appearance.

[Added 7/29/98] One slight advantage that the Boa Knot seems to have over Ashley 1201 is that it introduces no twist into the rope when tied in the bight, while 1201 does; thus, if one tied a series of such binder knots in succession in the bight of a single rope whose ends were fixed, the rope would eventually start to kink using 1201, but not the Boa. However, it is difficult to imagine a situation in which this one point would outweigh the other ways (described above) in which 1201 seems superior to the Boa.

For comparison, the Constrictor knot also introduces no twist, but the Constrictor With an Extra Turn [Ashley 1252] produces even more than 1201. The Clove Hitch produces the same amount of twist as 1201.

More on (possibly) new ways to tie old knots

[Added 3/4/98] The Flemish/Figure-eight bend and loop are popular for their strength, but much is made of how time-consuming they can be to tie. While this is true of the loop in cases where one can't just tie a figure-eight in a doubled end (as when hitching to a ring, say), it needn't be true of the bend form. Much easier than tying a figure eight in one end and following it back with the other (the standard method) is this: tie a Thief's Knot with long ends, then wrap each end around and tuck it through again. I'll make up diagrams when I have time, but the method should become clear if you just tie a Flemish bend by whatever method you know, then untuck each end once.

[Added 3/13/98] Here's the diagram. I think it pretty much explains itself.

[Added 3/19/98] Just a brief comment: this is exactly analogous to Ashley's method of tying a Ring Knot (Ashley 1412).

[Added 3/26/98] A simple method of tying a Barrel Knot (Ashley 1413, except this results in the ends opposite instead of parallel). With fewer twists this yields a Double Harness Bend (Ashley 1420), or with even fewer a Thief's Knot (this is how I begin the Flemish Bend, above).

Miscellaneous Notes

[Added 6/30/98] I recently, at a friend's request, created some new knot graphics to illustrate the IGKT's six-knot challenge.

[Some material relating to Desmond Mandeville's Neat and New Bend, previously presented on this page, was removed on 12/14/97.]