Plait loop - a versatile TIB,EEL, PETEE eyeknot

[xarax]

Recently, it was pointed out that a TIB loop would be more versatile ( and safer, because it would not run the danger to be tied in the “wrong” orientation ) if it could be loaded by either end ( Either End Loadable, or EEL ). However, if a loop can be loaded by either end, it would be great if it can also be tied in-the-end as PET from either end, too - PETEE ( Post Eye Tiable, Either End ) - for a number of reasons :
1st. PET loops are, most of the times, easy to untie ( that is the greatest advantage of the bowline ), because the knot tied on the Standing Part before the eye is topologically equivalent to the unknot, so it is not a “closed” on itself knot, which can accumulate and lock within it the induced tensile forces, like the overhand knot or the fig.8 knot, for example - which, if/when heavily loaded, it may become difficult to untie, or even it may jam. With the exception of the Clove hitch and the Constrictor, most “nipping structures” tied on the Standing Part before the eye, in most PET loops, generate loops that are easy to untie. Therefore, if we want a loop which can be loadable by either end, it is reasonable to expect that if both knots tied on the Standing Part are PET, the one before the eye ( the “nipping structure” ), and the other after / post the eye ( the “collar structure” - which I call like this to retain a correspondence with the common bowline ), the loop would be easy to untie regardless the end by which it had happened to be loaded.
2nd. I have seen that, even loaded by the 50% of the total load, the knot tied after / post the eye, the “collar structure”) may become difficult to untie, if it is an overhand knot or a fig.8 knot.
3rd. Even a TIB loop which has been tied in-the-bight for any reason ( some loops can be tied in-the-bight more easily and quickly than in-the-end ), may happen to have to be untied in-the-end, so it would be great if there is no “relic” knot left on the one end, if the loop is untied by releasing the other end.
4th. Last, but not least : Versatility. No knot tyer would ever question that value !

The loop presented in this post would, most probably, have been tied many times in the past ( I, for one, had tied many times, while I was exploring many different families of loops ), but, after the “new” EEL and the PETEE conditions, I decided to re-evaluate it - and I now believe it is OK : it is TIB, EEL and PETEE, and it is a nice knot ( well, if we view it from the one “flat” side, which looks like a plait - hence its new name. We can only say that the other side was not kissed by the Graces… However, that second side in not sooo ugly, so the net outcome, regarding beauty, is a knot above the average. )
As I said, one can reach it from many different starting posts : it is a modified Englishman s knot, a re-tucked TIB Samisen bowline, a “Span bend” turned into an eyeknot, a variation of the ABoK#1055, etc. (*)
The important thing is that it is a most versatile eyeknot, which we should explore further.

@xarax post:1

In the [i]Englishman knot/i, we can replace the two overhand knots (ABoK#1038), or the two fig.8 knots (ABoK#1040), with two interlinked crossing-knots. ( It was the geometry of the initial overhand knots or fig.8 knots we needed - so the ends of the loops could be locked securely inside the nub(s) by following convoluted enough paths - not the topology ! ) Doing this, we manage to transform the Englishman knot(s) into the PET TIB loop(s).

@xarax post:1

Take the Samisen bowline.. Re-tuck the Tail End through the collar.
Say Hocus Pocus, or, Abracadabra

• whatever of the two spells you wish, but it is imperative for you to say it, otherwise nothing will happen ! Then, try to release the eyeknot without using any of the two Ends : you will see that it became a TIB knot, and that now it can be tied starting from, or untied ending to, the unknot. Another interesting TIB bowline, worth of further examination.

P.S. 2015-05-17. As Alpineer indicated, the Plait loop can be considered a variation of the ABoK#1056 - and can be tied in-the-bight in exactly the same way, if we just “push” the lower collar of ABoK#1056 all the way “upwards”, to the top of the nub. If it is identical to the ABoK#1056 or not, is a subtle matter, because we do not know yet if the one knot can capsize into the other under heavy and/or non-favourable, not-symmetric ( regarding the ends and/or eyelegs ) loading. If they can, they should be considered identical - if they can not, then they should be considered as two forms of a “bistable knot” .
I have, by now, learned to tie the Plait loop in a different way, and it may be difficult to me to “turn back”, and tie it as I tie the ABoK#1056 loop ! Also, the way I tie the Plait loop generates the Plait loop immediately, without it having to pass through the intermediate stage of ABoK#1056 - and so I guess I will continue to tie it like this. However, knot tyers who had nod learned the way I show, may also tie it following the very simple way Ashley shows for the tying of the ABoK#1056.

---

[xarax]

.

---

[system]

It does well on looks, much better than some of that double collared pretzel ugliness.

I’ve been playing with the double dragon. Seems to get little attention. I don’t know how reliable it is loaded every which way. I saw that you don’t like the doubleness of it on philosophical grounds. I don’t quite find that fair in the case of that knot because I don’t find that the single should really count as when you flatten it, the single is just a weave, not a loop at all. I guess my defense is your critique.

Anyway, the double dragon gets little discussion although it’s included in many top 10 lists. How do you think it fits in? Oh as for ease of tying, you said something once about 2d being easier or methods being easier. For me, I need to understand a knot, in 3d, to remember it. Once I understood the DD, I can tie it on the the end of the rope easily upside down, backwards, flat, or around my finger.

[system]

I meant the tugboat. the loop I meant was the collar or whatever it is. I wasn’t trying to say a single dragon isn’t an actual loop not. I just mean the first loop of the double loops, doesn’t really count as a loop to me. I mean I fully understand the complete difference in action of the first vs second loop so I don’t find it fair to say, the knot is so weak it has to be doubled. I mean yes, but. You didn’t exactly want to say that either though. I don’t want to misrepresent. Clearly you just had well, a bad feel about it.

I don’t know about tying it under tension or one handed, but it ties in a bight or through a hole just fine.

[xarax]

Here is a way the loose knot of this loop may be “flattened” out. I had tried to retain the “symmetry” of the two interlocked crossing knots, and to show that it can be tied in-the-end starting from the one or the other end ( versatility ! :)). The two crossing knots are shown as two inter-weaved φ-shaped knots, topologically equivalent to the unknot. ( The lower-case Greek letter φ ( phi)(1), is used as symbol for numerous mathematical, physical and computer quantities - it will certainly do no harm if it is used in practical knotting, too. Alan Lee has tied many beautiful, secure bowline-like knots ( although most of them are somewhat more complex than this Plait loop ), where the nipping and/or the collar structure is shaped like a phi ).

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phi

P.S. We may say that, in the particular loose-knot form shown at the attached picture, the two interlinked φ-shaped knots remind the “similar” two links of the ABoK#1451 bend - only that there they are linked in an axially symmetric way, and not in a point symmetric way, as here.

---

[alpineer]

Probably better used in it’s ABoK #1054 Farmer’s Loop form.

[enhaut]

Well put Alpineer!
And from Ashley’s we also gain the benefit of the tying method

[xarax]

Two topologically equivalent knots are not identical !
Otherwise the unknot, or better, the straight line :), would had been the same knot as any TIB loop, any TIB loop would had been the same with any else, etc…
It is GEOMETRY which determines how a knot behaves, so what a knot is, not the topology ! (Just HOW many times should one say something, to be heard ? )
However, one can say, indeed, that the Farmer s loop and the Plait loop are “similar” - only that the Plait loop looks like a PLAIT, and the Farmer s loop looks like… a farmers whatever.
As for the tying method of the Farmer s loop ( which generates the Farmer s loop, of course ) it is, indeed, the WORST tying method shown in ABoK ! Well spotted, enhaut ! If one likes to present knotting as kind of magic, full of magic tricks and myths ( in order to present himself as magician… ), there is NO better way than the Farmer s-loop, tied by this “reasonable” to Farmer s-taste method.
The Plait loop is made from two almost identical crossing knots, the one tied in the Standing Part before the eye, and the other in the Standing Part after/post the eye -but, staring from either end, it is an either end PET loop. And it is made from such crossing knots, because I have seen that they are easily untied, even after heavy loading - while the Farmer s loop tangle is… well, a Farmer s tangle ! If one persuades me that the Farmer s loop is as easily untied, when loaded by either end ( EEL ), as the Plait s loop, then we can start discussing which is better. Of course, I doubt it : the segments of the first curves of the Farmer s loop are so much interweaved around each other, that I think that the loop would be turned into a farmer s rock piece of tangled rope. However, I think that I can safely say that the Farmer s loop is the most ugly of all Ashley s TIB loops - while the Plait loop is above average.( And "most ugly’, also means difficult to inspect … When there is no pattern, our brain can not find any mental handle to remember the correct form of a shape.)
In the Plait loop - which is the loops which looks like a plait, and it is an Englishman s knot where the overhand or the fig.8 knots have been replaced by crossing knots - I see a bight of a TIB knot turned into a higher collar, so I use the GENERAL method which generates all such loops, the “haltered collar” method. Try it…
When you guys see a knot, try to “see” it as it is, and do not try to rehearse every recipe you have learned when you were young ! I do not see ANY relation between the Plait loop and the Farmer s loop - perhaps because I am not a farmer… The Scot s TIB bowline and the Ampersand bowline are topologically identical, but geometrically so different knots, that I find it difficult to re-dress the one into the other - and I doubt if Scot himself has ever bothered to do it. Of course, with simpler loops, as the Plait loop and the Farmer s loop, things are easier, but still NOT so easy. Perhaps that is why I have not seen the Plait loop anywhere - although the Farmer s loop, and its “magic” = not-so-clever way of tying it, has been parroted thousands of times !
I, too, wonder why Ashley has not tied the Plait loop, although he had the bend from which he could start, the Span bend (1). He preferred to tie the ABoK#1055 instead, which is also a good TIB loop, probably better from the Farmer s loop - but not from the Plait loop.

1.http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4692.0

[roo]

@alpineer post:6

Probably better used in it’s ABoK #1054 Farmer’s Loop form.

Good eye, alpineer. By chance did you discover the relationship by loading the parent line of the unloaded loop and notice it capsize back to its Farmer’s Loop origin?

[alpineer]

@roo post:9

@alpineer post:6

Probably better used in it’s ABoK #1054 Farmer’s Loop form.

Good eye, alpineer. By chance did you discover the relationship by loading the parent line of the unloaded loop and notice it capsize back to its Farmer’s Loop origin?

Yes, that’s correct roo.

[xarax]

It is really funny what a knot tyers needs to say, for obscure reasons, when does not have anything to say !
Alpineer, enhaut ( who are knot tyers ), and “roo” ( who hopes he will become one, someday…), had imagined ( with their (minds) eyes wide shut, I guess… :)) that the Plait loop is the same knot with the Farmer s loop, and even that the one can “capsize” into the other…
So, I decided to offer them a gift, to congratulate them for their “correct” views…
A pattern for a plait, which they will give to their girl friends, to weave their long, beautiful hair.
It is nothing but a “capsized” Plait loop, or, according to those knot tyers, to the identical Farmer s loop, which has degenerated into a noose, topologically equivalent to the Plait loop, the Farmer s loop, and who knows to which other tangle…
Now, I will wait patiently for their girl friends opinion on this beautiful pattern.
( If I will do this, KnotGod will send me straight to the KnotHell ! - and a farmer who uses the Farmer s loop, to the pit of the pigs ! )
I have seen such an ugly tungly recently ( see the attached picture ), presented by Twine, at :
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=5247.msg34345#msg34345
I believe that is the worst Helical knot there can exist in the KnotLand !
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=5247.msg34352#msg34352
However, it is a nice plait, is nt it ?

---

[agent_smith]

Alpineer, enhaut ( who are knot tyers ), and "roo" ( who hopes he will become one, someday...), had imagined ( with their (minds) eyes wide shut, I guess.

Now, I will wait patiently for their girl friends opinion on this beautiful pattern

Hi Xarax,

I’m not sure if you will win too many friends here with these types of comments - even though you might see them as humorous.

I certainly like your work and your contributions to knotting knowledge in general.

Mark

[xarax]

I am sure Alpineer will appreciate my sense of humour ( which, when it bites a little more, he prefers to call “sarcasm” - however, I believe that when sarcasm is referring to one s self, and then only, it is even better than humour ), and enhaut is a good, creative knot tyer, only a little too serious with his own work. Roo, on the other hand… His signature tells all about him, in relation to me.
Thanks for the encouragement.
I have tried to show, time and again, that the topology does not uniquely determine the geometry, hence the structure and the physical properties of the practical knots which matter for us ( slippage, strength, easiness to tie and, especially, to untie ) - but also some properties difficult to measure : easiness to be inspected, memorized, remembered, be understood, be appreciated, and be loved. If one does not “see” any differences in all those aspects between the Plait loop and the Farmer s loop, then, well, it not my fault !
Having said that, I should also say that even a great knot tyer, Roger E. Miles, had not understood very well this issue. He tried to determine his knots and their symmetries by their 2D tying diagrams, and so he missed knots topologically equivalent to some of them, but geometrically different. There is a kind of subtle seductive power in the representation of the loose, “flattened” knot, that is, in the representation of its topological, mostly, properties, which misleads many people. The human mind is thriving for the very simple, even for the simplistic - and the 3D paths of the rope(s) in space are not sooo simple.
I had always tried to 'see" the knots beyond their particular tying methods, and their 2D diagrams, as they are in 3D space, as 3D rope structures / mechanisms. When one is prepared for that, he can decide in a glance if a knot is the “same” with another, or not - and he can “see” that the Plait loop and the Farmer s loop have no real similarity: although the one can be re-dressed to the other, and they can be represented by the same topological diagram, their properties are different, and, last but not least, the former is less ugly than the later !
Knots are tools, but also toys for men - if some knot tyers can not enjoy one soundly constructed and good looking knot, they deserve to suffer a little teasing !

[enhaut]

and enhaut is a good, creative knot tyer, only a little too serious with his own work.

That’s a good one and look who is speaking…

Regarding Xarax, given the nature of his tying works “in my mind eye” I always refer to him as the Retucking Master which I am sure he will not find offensive…

Seriously I find the Plait loop ok but not that good. Playing and tugging at all ends showed in my trials too much movement inside the nub whick can lead to early abrasion of the rope.
It’s just a serious opinion

[system]

Well I’m going to start using that double dragon for awhile. It’s cake to tie and I find nothing wrong with it needing two loops. It’s still not more rope than many secure bowlines etc and the question then is just does it work as well.

For the dragon, the first dragon loop is not really a nip at all and not really even a loop at all. The reason I couldn’t think to call it a nip or a collar is because really, to me, it seems like more of a locking pin in on the first go around but for nipping it’s structered as if you twisted the bowline rabbit hole backwards, ie it’s nothing(*). It only becomes a nip (for purposes of tensioning from the tail), on the full turn (2nd turn). Ok you can complain that’s why it’s bad, but I won’t fault the thing for not nipping well before it even has a nip. I’d rather fault a bowline for not nipping well enough when it DOES have a nip.

I’m not sure this will be a favorite knot, but it’s going in the tool bag for a little while especially since nobody seems to have a good reason for it not to be.

*Actually with a tiny modification for exactly that, tucking the dragon’s tail under itself instead of over while passing through the S-part loop, then the first pass of the tail does nip and you get with a “single” version a different loop knot, that I think also has a name, seems clearly better than a tugboat, but is I think not TIB and I suspect it jams.

[xarax]

@enhaut post:14

Playing and tugging at all ends showed in my trials too much movement inside the nub whick can lead to early abrasion of the rope.

Enhaut, we were searching for an EEL loop, not for an alternatively loadable loop ( ALP ) !
If the nub is rock solid during one-after-the-other end loading, it will be rock solid during untying, too…
However, I am sure that you had tied the knot in-the-end, and you had not pre-tightened it enough.
I am not aware of ANY other such TIB, PET starting from either end, EEL, easy to untie loop, so, until I learn something, I will keep it in my pantheon.
The important fact that you may not realize, is that the crossing-knot-based loops (which are relatively unknown and unexplored ) are always very easy to untie. The nipping structure of a crossing knot is, from its geometry, incapable to “close” around itself, and accumulate tensile forces, like rope-made ratchet. If we do not want to use crossing knots, we go back to the realm of bowlines ( which are more stable ), but then we get much more inner-nub motion…
See the bowline shown at (1) and at the attached pictures.
Also, the most interesting fact of the Plait loop, is that it is looks like a plait loop ! ( ( well, if you see it from the proper side ! :)). And that means that it is easily, and instantly, inspect-able - one should not underestimate this. In an EEL TIB loop, the task is to have a loop that can not be tied “wrongly”, and be loaded by the “wrong” side, so it means a knot that is easily tied, dressed and inspected.
I repeat, we want a loop that can be loaded by the one, the other, or both ends, NOT an in-line loop, which can be loaded alternately by the two sides of the long line…

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4603.msg29705#msg29705

---

[xarax]

I though that all knot tyers would had understood, right from the first post, that a TIB and EEL and PET ( starting from either end ) loop, would, most of the times, be tied in-the-bight, and not in-the-end. However, part of the versatility of this loop is that it can be tied and untied in-the-(one) end, without leaving any “relic” knot in the other end.
Now, I had seen that people jumped to easy conclusions AFTER the moment I had shown the 2D diagram of the loose knot, which is just a representation of the topology of the knot, NOT its geometry - so, it is not a recommendation of any tying method in-the-end ! I had wished to show the symmetry of the configuration (regarding the two crossing knots before AND after the eye ), which is retained in the compact, final form of the knot, the only form that matters !
If one tries to tie this loop in the end, he may dress it wrongly, because he will not pay due attention to the simple fact ( which I keep repeating again and again in this thread ), that this in NOT the Farmer s loop, this is a crossing knot based eyeknot, and that it remains such an eyeknot when it is loaded by either end ! Therefore, he should first UNDERSTAND / “see” this obvious fact, and only tie the knot afterwards ! If you do not want to keep the crossing knots, the one or the other, you may straighten one of them up, and tie a different knot !
I am not sure which is the best way to tie this knot in-the-end - from which of the two crossing knots one should better start to tie it… I guess it will depend on the experience one has with the tying of the particular knot, and tying it with a particular tying method ( one of the many one can figure out ).
However, given the “purpose” of this loop, I am mostly interested in tying it in-the-bight. And it can be tied in-the-bight very easily, indeed, in a conceptually easy way, during which the knot tyer can WATCH the overall shape of the knot, and see the “upper” bight be transformed into the “higher” collar around the end (1). This is what the “haltering/haltered collar” method achieves. If one ties it following that method, he will not run the danger to straighten out any of the two geometrically and structurally indispensable, necessary, essential crossing knots. - and he will not run the danger to tie the difficult to inspect / ugly Farmer s loop instead !

1. Another description of this advantage, at
   http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4695.msg33927#msg33927

( Click to enlarge the second picture )

P.S. 2015-05-17. As Alpineer indicated, the Plait loop can be tied exactly as Ashley shows the tying of the ABoK#1056. Those two loops may be considered as variations of each other, iff any one of them can capsize to the other under heavy loading - or under a special, rare, but possible nevertheless loading ( through this end and that eyeleg, for example ).
After one has tied the ABoK#1056, he just have to “push” the lower collar of it all the way to the top of the nub, and tie the Plait loop. I believe that this is a very simple method to tie it in-the-bight, and, as it is well-known already because of is popularization by Ashley, it may well become the method of choice for most knot tyers. Personally, I can not “switch” my mind yet, because I have learned the method I show in this post, which generates the final Plait loop, without the “intermediate” stage of the ABoK#1056.

---

[system]

Well in your first picture it was clear that it was a bowline but with backwards passage through the hole both times, so yes clearly tying it in a bight is just this. That’s when I realized I had tied this many times, but probably dressed it the ugly way.

[xarax]

When I say " reeve the whole knot through this bight ", I mean to do what leads to the same result as this act - in fact, you just let the bight itself “swallow” the whole knot, moving it first “downwards”, then around the whole knot, and then “upwards” again, to become the collar.
Dan Lehman calls this a “flype”, but my knowledge of the Scottish dialect tells me that “flype” is something else, in which you do not turn the whole thing inside out, like a glove, but half of it ( the word is used for women s long socks, and the act of grasping the inside heel of the sock and pulling it out half-way, to wear the sock more easily ).
Ashley uses this technique many times, but he does not offer a name for it. See, for example, how he ties the Double Ring hitch ( ABoK#1126 ).

[system]

I was trying to tie this thing with the end of the rope and I instead accidentally tied a loop with a box stitch knot, the first layer of one of these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scoubidou