I can only hope that this knot can be somehow improved , and will be improved in the future, by you or by Dan Lehman… if that is what he had in mind. To my mind, this thing is more of a “tangle”, than a neat hitch, like the fine, beautiful one Dan Lehman himself devised sometime ago (1). So, I would be happy to be left with the memory of that hitch/binder as THE Dan Lehman hitch/binder, and not with this last one…(that I could not have remembered, ever if I had wished to…).
Speaking of the shown hitch, I understand why the things that we can not show, we should speak about ! ( I am paraphrasing Wittgenstein here… :)). In the end of the day, it is not so bad a hitch - but we have dozens of hitches…Coming from a “Oriental” country, I would say that it is “bon pour l orient” :). If you wish a hitch with interlinked/crossed or parallel opposed bights, see (2) and (3).
Excellent, and shown w/enough space to see parts.
(I didn’t want to seem hard w/words, but really believe
that language should suffice in many cases; here, to
beget an accompanying image. Of course, words can
mislead, but in back’n’forth Q/A, things can be worked out.)
The key elements : the opposed-bights for a stay-tied lock;
the turns around the object for a grip-in-place effect.
That was the simple recipe, with allowance on varying
the number of turns (and on which half --I believe that
on the SPart’s half they are more surely tensioned) per
conditions & desired effect (up to a point).
In the case of PT use of a surgical tubing, I suspect that
in-use forces might well do little to the hitch if it’s well
tensioned in tying --and that means that the set hitch
will not be distorted and lose integrity, and so on.
I also think that this uncommon material demands
some special treatment in setting; less stretchy
materials could do more self-tightening of this knot.
To tension this, I’d try laying on the left-side wraps
with considerable tension, leaving the right-side wraps
to be worked tight, after completing the knot (bringing
out the SPart). One will want to anticipate the effect
of pulling against the small eye --i.e., to plan for its
elasticity so tightened–, haul back on the opposing
bight (the U-turn through the eye), and then tediously
work tension around the wraps to pull out on the SPart,
which should be nipped to hold this tension (in theory 
).
Thanks,
–dl*
I somehow doubt this will be simple enough for the average patient to apply at home on their own.
Pictures - even one f…picture - would suffice in many more cases - and here, too !
“sparing another camera-click and special offload/upload” is not what helped people understand what you were talking about - if that is what you had wished, in the first place. Unless you think it is a necessary gymnastics, that new members should suffer…a baptism into the river of blah-blah that the new member is going to be immersed in, soon.
Yes, indeed, the recipe was simple and correct.. but a cook should do more than follow a recipe! 
I will repeat it once more: I hope that this thing can be improved, simplified, and turned into a neat hitch. Because now it is not, I am afraid. One will not die if he eats this all-into-the-plate food, but he would not appreciate the art of the cook either - and he will probably never return to this restaurant again. Gentlemen, turn this frog into a prince !
+1. And, as I look at it, I wonder at some improved
tying going the opposite direction --directly wrapping
SPart, making the collar, wrapping a bit AND THEN
making, with the tail, whatever finish will get one
some “opposed-bights” nipping (such as a turn through
the collar + stopper, or simple hitch). This would be
easier to effect, as it requires no or little “working”.
Anyway, the illustration serves at least to give some
substance to the elements I thought could work
–those nipping bights and wraps. Practically, with
the particular material of surgical tubing, one can
do as well in result more simply in tying.
–dl*
It got the OP to the result, with one iteration of
initial wording and clarification. He is “people” enough.
Often, words can refer to a know structure and give
the new one by points of differentiation.
the river of blah-blah that the new member is going to be immersed in, soon.
And the pot speaks blackly … !
;D
Just because this is a persional comment, and I know that you are trying a desparate contre-attaque through this, I will reply :
If we count the relation of my blah-blah to the number of pictures of knots that I have posted to this forum those three years, and yours blah-blah to the pictures you have posted in this forum those X years, we are going to discover NUMBERS that you would be ashamed off, believe me !
P.S. It had just occurred to me a method to finance our knot testing endeavor - with the many different materials we were talking about the other day. We will count the number of words - let us call it A- and the number of pictures - let us call it B- that each of us has posted in this Forum. We will divide ( you know, “division”, the fourth of the simple arithmetic operations… :)) the A by the B, for each of us. The winner will be he for whom the A/B is bigger - I mean, reeeally, awesomely bigger ! So, he will pay for the 50m. of rope we will need to test each knot 20 times ( in fact, 100, because we have to test knots tied on/with wet ropes as well…)
Richard,
I am new to this site however I think a clove hitch with a half-hitch on the tubing or rubber tape would hold well. Seeing that is something that we used up in Alaska on our set net sites and had to fight water going up to 45MPH in the cook inlet with a boyee on the other end.
AJ :o
I got around to picking up some surgical tubing (3/16") among angling supplies. I was surprised at how hard it was to get locally. It’s pretty fun stuff to play with, although it says it contains lead, so I guess I should wash my hands now.
The most user-friendly option, in my opinion, the tensionless hitch (using a small permanent loop), worked, although if the motion got too wild, things could spring open a bit, which probably wouldn’t be desirable. However, this is easily addressed. The coefficient of friction of this stuff is so high that orbiting around the hitching object doesn’t really cause sliding. Thus, you can hold some tension around and in the tensionless hitch by orbiting once or twice around the hitch body with the standing part.
The simplified Klemheist and Prusik had similar results, although they seemed to use more material than would be desired.
Making multiple turns around a rail finished with a Gnat Hitch tightened up to the rail and holding tension worked well and probably required the least material.
Bending normal rope to the tubing with a Zeppelin Bend also worked well. Then, you’d have to apply some multi-coil snug hitch with rope to resist lengthwise motion. Multiple turns of rope finished with a Gnat Hitch or even two half hitches may well be good enough, too.
As far as the original Fist Hitch, it seemed to work well enough, although wild lengthwise oscillations caused the free end to slowly slip. Simpler approaches would probably be more appropriate for patients at home, anyway.
Hello Richard,
It is good to meet you. Judging from your opening post you are well acquainted with the world of knots and very much understand the functionality of their operation. I am surprised that we have not seen you here before now.
The knot you bring to us and somewhat modestly call ‘the Ossel knot but with a round turn’, is, although only a small change , none the less a fundamental improvement which has eliminated the prime weakness of the Ossel (that it is prone to hold itself open at the key nipping point). Your enhancement functionally separates the gripping loop from the reversal bight and is for me an excellent example of a Nodeologist exercising his skills.
Re strength, yes, the SP curving around the reversal bight is going to be the weak point, but I should not worry about it if I were you as the angle is only of the order of around 50 degrees and even less if the knot is left relatively slack when it is dressed before putting it under tension.
The issue of failure with repeated longitudinal flogging in slick braids is fundamental to the design, as lateral tension on the reversal bight can momentarily tug on the turn attached to the nipped end before the all important SP tension reaches the round turn to nip the end. If this weakness is a great issue to your use of the knot, a small improvement can be had by taking the end under both strands of the round turn, then back over the knot then tuck it under the reversal turn strand (in slick polyester braid on a high gloss plastic tube, this mod still failed but took over 200 reversals to start the slackening process, while unmodified it would fail in ca 30 reversals).
This knot is definitely a keeper for me although I will probably use it with two small mods. First I will take the end under both strands of the round turn and second I will slip the end for ease of removal.
Well done – Have you thought of naming it?
Derek
I hope that’s not the same kind I have! Is your latex? Seeing that it was got among angling supplies, do you think maybe some other part like a weight might be the item that contains lead, not the tubing?
I think there are latex and latex-free surgical tubes, but I think they would all be highly elastic and generally grippy.
Thank you! I’m really quite novice and wide-eyed at all the knowledge that is shared in a place like this.
The knot you bring to us and somewhat modestly call 'the Ossel knot but with a round turn', is, although only a small change , none the less a fundamental improvement which has eliminated the prime weakness of the Ossel (that it is prone to hold itself open at the key nipping point). Your enhancement functionally separates the gripping loop from the reversal bight and is for me an excellent example of a Nodeologist exercising his skills.
That separation is the main benefit of this knot, as I see it.
As I was experimenting with various structures in surgical tubing, any wrap or bight that passed directly over the standing part tended to get lifted away from the pole as it was loaded, owing to the elasticity of the material.
Take the clove hitch as an example. Imagine that the wrap that holds down the standing part and tail is pinned or glued to the standing part, right where they cross. They are stuck together. Now as you load the knot, the nip is pulled open, and the tail escapes.
This is the general action that I observed in surgical tubing - a combination of sticking and slipping. I have not been able to predict exactly where things stick and slip (and thus can’t claim to fully understand it), but it seems that often, wraps and bights that cross the standing part stick to the standing part as it is loaded. I think tubing may act grippier as it is stretched. In addition, the tail, having little tension on it, tends to spring, slide and/or pop right out of any nip that has been loosened.
Thus in many knots I tied, the standing part grips whatever is involved in a nip, opens it up, and the tail slides or wiggles out.
Even something like a bowline opens up. As the loop is loaded, the little half hitch opens right up, and the tail can slip right out.
From reading other people’s feedback on this thread, it seems that some have had different experiences with surgical tubing. Others were able to make several knots to work that I had no success with. Maybe they are just better at fairing up and tightening the knots than I, or perhaps my single length of tubing is not representative of how tubing generally behaves. I’m not sure.
In any case, I came up with the proposed hitch in order to avoid this whole situation. No amount of loading or stretching will open up the nip - something that can be said of surprisingly few hitches that I examined.
This knot is definitely a keeper for me although I will probably use it with two small mods. First I will take the end under both strands of the round turn and second I will slip the end for ease of removal.I like that - tucking under both passes of the round turn. It does seem to jam a little bit more. I would assume it can only improve the nip, as your experiments bore out.
Well done -- Have you thought of naming it?
I called it the “Fist Hitch” for the few months between discovering it and sharing it here, just because it looks to me like a fist. With the tail tucked under both strands of the round turn as you suggest, it looks even more like a fist.
In structure, it is obviously an Ossel with a round turn. But it doesn’t act much like the Ossel, so I’m not sure if just calling it something like a “modified Ossel” is useful.
Pardon this late response. I have no Ashley’s Book of Knots and don’t want to search one out and buy it for one simple question. Does the ‘ossel hitch’ have an ABOK number? I would like to state authoritatively whether it does or not. If it does not then I should think that situation odd - but beside the point. If so - what is it? I have found no answer from other Internet resources.
Thank-you to anyone that replies…
From what I have read the word “ossel” is a Scottish word and although ABoK #273 - called the Netline Knot and originating in Corwall - is very close to the Ossel Knot (which is usually though not always shown with a round turn to the right of the 2 riding turns) there seems to be no mention of the Ossel Hitch by name or illustration (it’s confusing that both are hitches but differ in construction yet one is known as a hitch whilst the other is called a knot).
Barry
Thank you for the information…
It’s a beauty. I love that hitch, so now it’s in my toolbox. ;D