Roo has brought my attention to some years-ago exploration of slip-free hitches,
done to redress the shortcomings of the treacherous (but popular) “Highwayman’s
Hitch”, aka “Draw Hitch”. As Roo aims to further enhance his presentation of these
knots, he enquired re some details and my response seemed appropriate to see
greater light, to be shared.
We each had been aware that the Highwayman’s Hitch has a dangerous vulnerability
to capsize in not uncommon circumstances: where the hitched object is relatively
wide, where the cordage is soft or even stiff (stiff begetting a not-well-drawn-up knot).
In cases where the slip-tuck is long, the knot will likely capsize into a secure hitch
–and too secure to be released without some effort–; otherwise, it can spill.
My terms are:
“slip-free” ::= the knot slips to bring the cordage completely free of the object
“nip-bight” ::= a bight that presses against the toggle part of the knot
“frame” ::= that part of the knot & maybe object against which the toggle is pressed
“slip-tuck” ::= the bight whose removal spills the knot, and is typically the toggle
In the Highwayman’s H., the SPart forms the nip-bight, and so delivers great pressure
against the slip-tuck; the frame is a bight surrounding the nip-bight. The great force
of the SPart too easily can collapse the slip-tuck through the frame (after which there
is some hope that the frame/bight will capture and hold the slip-tuck bight-end).
But there are some quite simple remedies to the Highwayman’s Hitch, one of which
I saw published in [u]Outdoor Knots , 2004, by Clyde Soles (Mountaineers pub.).
Cf. www.geocities.com/roo_two/index.html
Roo asked:
“1.) Do you want the hitch shown attributed to you if I do a write-up on it,
or do you think it should be attributed to someone else?
2.) If you do think it’s appropriate for me to attribute the hitch to you,
would you prefer a different name for it?”
And I replied:
For you they originated from me, and for me they originated from exploring
alternatives to the treacherous Highwayman’s Hitch. So, that much is pretty
simple/factual and might as well be said (and if you have dates, they are likely
pretty close, IIRC, to when I was fiddling around [I could find dates for these in
some notes, … AHA, voila => 20030531-Saturday-16:00).
How they might have found daylight for others is unknown to us at this writing.
(It should be a simple enough matter to arrive at them and like knots after seeing
the Highwayman’s H.; but it seems that innovative exploration isn’t broadly done
or published.)
As for names, argh, knot-naming is a challenge.
If one were just adding a knot to a set of 5 to 20, even, it would probably not
be a big chore to arrive at a suitably distinct & slightly descriptive name.
“Tumble knot”, because … , sadly is like “Slip-free hitch” which Clyde Soles
took from my use of it as a sub-class name for another similar variation
–yes, a name suitable for a set of knots, particular to none (unless it’s the
only knot like that that one knows).
It wasn’t obvious to me on first glance that you in fact show TWO knots,
and not merely the same knot from two perspectives (front/back)! Giving
names will help clear this up.
-
You should present the Highwayman’s Hitch, so to apprise readers of what
that is (and you’ll explain why it’s not so good), and to show that the alternatives
are quite similar in appearance & function (w/o as much risk of failure). This is
both offensive & defensive in effect: warning of the confusion from such
similar appearances, but reassuring in that the better options are every bit as
easy to make. -
Then, the upper knot as you present so far can be seen as a simple improvement
on the Highwayman’s hitch–it takes the end’s slip-tuck around from the opposite
side, better securing it. So, perhaps we can snatch a name from this quickly before
we think others deserve the name as much: Improved Highwayman’s Hitch (or some
such indication)–as the start up to the final move is the same, only the finish differs.
And the different finish keeps the toggle up around the object, which serves as part
of the “frame” against which it jams–in contrast to the HighH. in which this structural
part is drawn down by tension and a bit OFF of the object, pressed into sometimes
a dangerously unoccupied space and enabling collapse–which, if the slip-bight is
long enough, often results in a locked/jammed/secure but unslippable hitch (and
IGKT’s Owen Nuttall presented such a hitch (sans bight, IIRC), and I’ll surmise that
he came to it by just such a HighH. failure and thought “Hey, but THIS locks up well!”). :o -
The variation presented in Clyde Soles’s (Mountaineers pub., 2004) [u]Outdoor Knots
(pp.143-4 (photos 144)) is started as in your lower knot, with the slip-tuck taken directly
up in front of the object and tucked back through the nip-bight. This and the one you show
thus make a signficant structural departure from the above in having the heavily loaded
bight directly bear against the frame bight and not the slip-tuck, which comes under less
pressure.
Thinking outside of the box --heck, way out, even, say “outdoors” (!)–, why not name this
knot after the book publicizing it, initialed into something pronounceable:
Outdoor
Knots
BOok
Quick
Release . . . = > “OKBOQR” ock-bock-er .
Catchy?
Well, you’ve witnessed the troubled birth of this moniker.
Hey, I’m trying.
((“Roo, should we just tie this off with an Okboqr so it’s fast to un-do?” "With a WHAT?! " )) -
Then your lower knot can show a like-#2 taking of the end around to the Far Side and another
securing, and show how that seems more sure in pressing the slip-tuck down against the object
than is the Improved HighH (the chance of that heavily loaded nipping bight sucking the slip-tuck
down through the frame worries me–it’s a YMMV and I don’t want variance from “holds/works”!).
So, here is a one way one can explore from a known base to find ELFEKS,
although it wasn’t all so methodical as might be done. And these are just
a few of the many like structures that can be found; I made some search
for ones that could release under tension (with mixed results).
