A Double, crossed nipping loops bowline.

[X11]

Thank you Mark,

I have made a somehow arbitrary choice, with two purposes :
a ; to reduce the number of loops we will call by the name “bowline”
b : to name as “bowlines” loops that do look like the standard bowline.

So, I had decided that, in order to call an end-of-line loop a bowline, it should better have a “proper” collar, i.e. a collar just like the collar of the standard common bowline. (The ABoK#1033 has not such a “proper” collar, so I do not call it a bowline.)
However, I have also decided that I would not kill myself if there is a different consensus by the knot tyers community… It is not so important a matter, I believe.
Regarding the presence or not of a “proper” collar, and/or of a “proper” nipping loop, read the following comment ( written a long time ago), of how to include all the knots that are really similar in structure to the standard bowline ( the ABoK#1010) in a coherent family of knots :

@xarax post:45

We have four distinct strategies : The first is to have a broader concept of the collar … and the second is to have a broader concept of the nipping loop… The third is to have both, and the fourth is to have none of them… I will not hesitate to adopt the one or the other, or both, or none - provided this will help us study the knots we already know, and the knots we are going to learn if we adopt any one of the those four strategies.

The loop presented in this thread contains all the components and the structure necessary to be regarded as a bowline variant, that is for sure ! In fact, its differences from the standard Double bowline can be regarded as minor ones - yet I believe that they are very important. As I have stressed, this particular form of the double nipping loop is very stable ; it does not need the help -or even the mere presence- of the collar, in order to remain a closed loop when it is loaded. The nipping structures of most of the other bowlines ( with the exception of some double nipping loop bowlines, as the Water bowline and the girth-hitched bowline), the moment they lose their collar, they also lose their necessary stability, and they degenerate into open helices.
Of course, one can further improve the security of this bowline by adding a second collar - just like one does to get the “Janus” or the “mirrored” variants. However, I believe that, before we duplicate the number of the collars of a bowline, we should better try to improve the single collar form, by improving the nipping and the self-stabilizing ability of its nipping structure.