|
sittingduck
Aug 19, 2003, 3:44 PM
Post #26 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 19, 2003
Posts: 338
|
You are RIGHT lazide, the fig.8 will walk the rope and untie if weighted crosswise, thanks for the head up, in my mind the fig.8 could take any force at any direction! Glad I'm in the habit of tying a fisherman with the spare end as a backup.
|
|
|
|
|
alpiner
Aug 19, 2003, 4:08 PM
Post #27 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 23, 2003
Posts: 210
|
In reply to: That is not even a bowline.
Yes it is. Just a different way of tying it. Pay attention to the directions and you get a proper single bowline.
The whole strength issue is moot since knots don't break in the real world...coming untied is a different matter and that is just pilot error.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Aug 19, 2003, 5:17 PM
Post #28 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
Crap, you're right, I crossed over instead of under in step 3, DOH! did it 5 times no less, no more drinking while knot tying I guess.
But that is still the most bizzare way to tie a bowline I ever saw.
|
|
|
|
|
fracture
Aug 19, 2003, 7:44 PM
Post #29 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2003
Posts: 1814
|
Hey I just saw this in google's image cache. Can someone who knows (e.g. jt, not dirtineye :wink:) tell me what's up with this knot?
http://images.google.com/...s/thumbs/78/7829.jpg
It looks like the DBBB, except the way I learned the DBBB (which wasn't from climbing magazine; someone showed it to me) the tail comes out on the other side of the bowline backup (it wraps around the other way and goes back through the "hole", if you know what I mean, ending up with 3 parts of the rope going through the "rabbit hole"). Am I (and the person I learned it from) doing it wrong?
Or is this pic just a different double bowline variant?
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Aug 19, 2003, 8:13 PM
Post #30 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
In reply to: Hey I just saw this in google's image cache. Can someone who knows (e.g. jt, not dirtineye :wink:) tell me what's up with this knot? http://images.google.com/...s/thumbs/78/7829.jpg It looks like the DBBB, except the way I learned the DBBB (which wasn't from climbing magazine; someone showed it to me) the tail comes out on the other side of the bowline backup (it wraps around the other way and goes back through the "hole", if you know what I mean, ending up with 3 parts of the rope going through the "rabbit hole"). Am I (and the person I learned it from) doing it wrong? Or is this pic just a different double bowline variant?
I just re-created the knot in your pic. I don't know if it has a name, but it seems to be just a single bowline knot with a backup that is kind of an overhand knot threaded through the bowline. There must be 101 different variations on the bowline, and I'm sure most of them work fine.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
fracture
Aug 19, 2003, 9:02 PM
Post #31 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2003
Posts: 1814
|
In reply to: In reply to: Hey I just saw this in google's image cache. Can someone who knows (e.g. jt, not dirtineye :wink:) tell me what's up with this knot? http://images.google.com/...s/thumbs/78/7829.jpg It looks like the DBBB, except the way I learned the DBBB (which wasn't from climbing magazine; someone showed it to me) the tail comes out on the other side of the bowline backup (it wraps around the other way and goes back through the "hole", if you know what I mean, ending up with 3 parts of the rope going through the "rabbit hole"). Am I (and the person I learned it from) doing it wrong? Or is this pic just a different double bowline variant? I just re-created the knot in your pic. I don't know if it has a name, but it seems to be just a single bowline knot with a backup that is kind of an overhand knot threaded through the bowline. There must be 101 different variations on the bowline, and I'm sure most of them work fine. GO
It definitely isn't a single bowline; the "rabbit hole" has two loops.
|
|
|
|
|
fracture
Aug 19, 2003, 9:18 PM
Post #32 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2003
Posts: 1814
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Hey I just saw this in google's image cache. Can someone who knows (e.g. jt, not dirtineye :wink:) tell me what's up with this knot? http://images.google.com/...s/thumbs/78/7829.jpg It looks like the DBBB, except the way I learned the DBBB (which wasn't from climbing magazine; someone showed it to me) the tail comes out on the other side of the bowline backup (it wraps around the other way and goes back through the "hole", if you know what I mean, ending up with 3 parts of the rope going through the "rabbit hole"). Am I (and the person I learned it from) doing it wrong? Or is this pic just a different double bowline variant? I just re-created the knot in your pic. I don't know if it has a name, but it seems to be just a single bowline knot with a backup that is kind of an overhand knot threaded through the bowline. There must be 101 different variations on the bowline, and I'm sure most of them work fine. GO It definitely isn't a single bowline; the "rabbit hole" has two loops.
Actually you might be right; I tried to tie it, and the only way I could get it to look similar was to tie a single bowline and follow the hole back around.
Weird.
|
|
|
|
|
full-time-climb
Deleted
Aug 19, 2003, 11:23 PM
Post #33 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
The pik above seems to be a backup tied downward. I also use two wraps on the rabbit hole. I then use a single fisherman's above the knot. Some of my buddies use a fisherman's below the knot on the loop that goes through the harness.
I will add a cautionary note. "The working end should be inward on the knot and not outward." This would have the working end down through the center instead of down on the outside.
Like the sketch I push a loop down through the rabbit hole to retreave the working end. Works great. Easy to teach.
After the knot is complete I feed the working end up along side the main rope and tie a fishermans knot. It is a thing of beauty.
John
I'll dig up my camera and post a pik.
|
|
|
|
|
slcliffdiver
Aug 20, 2003, 12:44 AM
Post #34 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2002
Posts: 489
|
Dirtineye the first part of the pic for the retrace bowline is an easy way to tie it one handed. The first part is basically the cinch knot that people use to tie off pins short or chicken heads with webbing. While the loop is pushed through all you need to do is grab the tail (with your hand and pull it through the loop then pull on the rope end that goes away from the climber, viola bowline. Clear as mud?
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Aug 20, 2003, 1:34 AM
Post #35 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
It is not hard to tie a bowline one handed. Unlike that other one in the pic, I can tie a bowline while drunk haha, and once you have a bowline you can make a yosemite finish with ease or make a reweave or retrace from the normal bowline.
I really wonder when you might need to tie a one handed tie in though, cause when you are changing your tie in you are usually tethered at an achor or on the ground or somewhere else that allows use of two hands.
On the other hand, it's kind if fun to tie knots one handed and it comes in handy sometimes. (puns intended)
About chicken heads, I go round and round on what knot I like, sometimes it s a clove, sometimes a slip knot, and you can even tie a constrictor which is a sort of clove relative, but the clove is so easy to tie one handed, I think I like it the best most of the time. I guess the girth hitch is out of favor these days, but I've seen people drape slings over knobs and horns before, now THAT is scary.
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Aug 20, 2003, 1:58 AM
Post #36 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
Jay,
thanks for the pic.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 20, 2003, 3:48 PM
Post #37 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: I really wonder when you might need to tie a one handed tie in though...
When one arm is broken.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Aug 20, 2003, 5:28 PM
Post #38 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
So you break you arm while not tied in, and need to tie in? Don't you think you probably would break your arm falling and still be tied in about 99 percent of the time?
But, allowing that this could happen, then you need to be able to tie the knots with eihter hand, cause you don't know what arm you'll break.
Seriously, can anyone come up with a scenario or a report or a real situation where someone had to tie knots one handed? For scenarios, the more plausable the better.
I'm curious about this.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Aug 20, 2003, 5:44 PM
Post #39 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Back to the original question: Anyone know of any data (personal experience included) showing that a single bowline with a Yosemite backup is any less safe than a double bowline with same?
GO
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 20, 2003, 6:57 PM
Post #40 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: So you break you arm while not tied in, and need to tie in? Don't you think you probably would break your arm falling and still be tied in about 99 percent of the time?
If you were tied in when you fell, then you'd be tied in. If you weren't, then wouldn't be. I think the scenario is that you've fallen while scrambling unroped and have broken your arm. Someone lowers you a rope and you have to tie in one-handed to be rescued. You probably don't have a harness with you either, so the knot you want to be able to tie one-handed is the bowline-on-a-coil.
Probably not a lot of call for this skill sport climbing.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 20, 2003, 7:04 PM
Post #41 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Back to the original question: Anyone know of any data (personal experience included) showing that a single bowline with a Yosemite backup is any less safe than a double bowline with same? GO
No, but where would such data come from? Comparisons of accident rates? These events are so rare that the relative risk could not be reliably determined, even if the necessary denominators (eg, the numbers of climbers who use each type of knot) were available.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Aug 20, 2003, 7:24 PM
Post #42 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: Back to the original question: Anyone know of any data (personal experience included) showing that a single bowline with a Yosemite backup is any less safe than a double bowline with same? GO
According to Setnicka of the Wilderness Rescue Society, the mountaineering bowline (AKA double bowline, AKA double turn or round turn bowline) is 5 % stronger than a regular bowline. Both can be tied with a yosemite finish. Both should have a backup knot of some sort, usually a half hitch or a yosemite. That's out of "On Rope".
Fasulo in "Self Rescue", shows the double bowline with yosemite finish and a double fisherman's backup.
I use the bowline with a yosemite finish (A backup itself) with a double fisherman's backup
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Aug 20, 2003, 7:49 PM
Post #43 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
In reply to: In reply to: Back to the original question: Anyone know of any data (personal experience included) showing that a single bowline with a Yosemite backup is any less safe than a double bowline with same? GO No, but where would such data come from? Comparisons of accident rates? These events are so rare that the relative risk could not be reliably determined, even if the necessary denominators (eg, the numbers of climbers who use each type of knot) were available. -Jay
If someone has had a personal experience with an accident using either type of knot, I'd like to know, and yes, Jay, I'm perfectly clear on the statistical significance of a personal anecdote. Similarly, if anyone knew of published data on the testing of the two knots, I would assume that that paper would show the specific number of tests, on what, and under what conditions. This would be very iteresting to me, however anyone who is not interested is under no obligation to read, much less post.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 20, 2003, 8:27 PM
Post #44 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Back to the original question: Anyone know of any data (personal experience included) showing that a single bowline with a Yosemite backup is any less safe than a double bowline with same? GO No, but where would such data come from? Comparisons of accident rates? These events are so rare that the relative risk could not be reliably determined, even if the necessary denominators (eg, the numbers of climbers who use each type of knot) were available. -Jay Jay - if you don't know, a simple "I don't know" would suffice. Or don't post at all.
Um, excuse me?
If my only response would have been "I don't know," I wouldn't bother to respond. However, my response was not "I don't know." It was that hard data is unlikely to exist. If you don't see why pointing this out is relevant, then I would invite you not to respond to my post.
In reply to: If someone has had a personal experience with an accident using either type of knot, I'd like to know, and yes, Jay, I'm perfectly clear on the statistical significance of a personal anecdote.
I was commenting on "data," not anecdotes. My point was that there is not likely to be any such data. Why such a response would turn you into a raving lunatic is unclear.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
slcliffdiver
Aug 20, 2003, 8:36 PM
Post #45 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2002
Posts: 489
|
Actually the knot in the book is not the yosimite finish you showed me I had my terminology wrong. It doesn't go around and through the tie in. It's the one I use for the "double" bowline whatever it's called. It's the one thing that scares me a bit that people will use this finish with a single bowline (it's okay with a double). It's also may be a reason to use a double bowline if you mess up the yosimite finish with a double bowline you still have a good knot. For those that have the book (don't do this with a real tie in demo only) tie the knot in the book with a single bowline, now switch position of the strands that are coming out of the knot. Do this a few times and pull on the strand going out of the knot and the one that is the rabit coming around the tree. Scarry hey. I know a couple things might have to happen to make the knot fail but I don't think it's out of the question of them happening especially on a tie in. Gotta go I'll give more details for those who don't have the book when I get back if there is interest.
In reply to: According to Setnicka of the Wilderness Rescue Society, the mountaineering bowline (AKA double bowline, AKA double turn or round turn bowline) is 5 % stronger than a regular bowline. Both can be tied with a yosemite finish. Both should have a backup knot of some sort, usually a half hitch or a yosemite. That's out of "On Rope". Fasulo in "Self Rescue", shows the double bowline with yosemite finish and a double fisherman's backup. I use the bowline with a yosemite finish (A backup itself) with a double fisherman's backup |
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Aug 20, 2003, 9:02 PM
Post #46 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
EEK if you mean the fasulo book, yes you are right that is not the yosemite finish in the picture.
But it SHOULD BE LOL, according to On Rope, where the pictures are correct.
I agree that that finish is scary on a single bowline.
YOu might try looking up that guy in the wilderness rescue society for some testing info. I was told by a friend who took an AMGA course that the bowlines were coming apart when loaded around the loop, and that is when the need for finishes became apparent, through rescue work. It makes sense that the rescue folks would have a reason for recommending one over the other, but finding the test results or stories that back it up may be hard.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Aug 21, 2003, 7:06 PM
Post #47 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Back to the original question: Anyone know of any data (personal experience included) showing that a single bowline with a Yosemite backup is any less safe than a double bowline with same? GO No, but where would such data come from? Comparisons of accident rates? These events are so rare that the relative risk could not be reliably determined, even if the necessary denominators (eg, the numbers of climbers who use each type of knot) were available. -Jay Jay - if you don't know, a simple "I don't know" would suffice. Or don't post at all. Um, excuse me? If my only response would have been "I don't know," I wouldn't bother to respond. However, my response was not "I don't know." It was that hard data is unlikely to exist. If you don't see why pointing this out is relevant, then I would invite you not to respond to my post. In reply to: If someone has had a personal experience with an accident using either type of knot, I'd like to know, and yes, Jay, I'm perfectly clear on the statistical significance of a personal anecdote. I was commenting on "data," not anecdotes. My point was that there is not likely to be any such data. Why such a response would turn you into a raving lunatic is unclear. -Jay
Sorry you saw my response as being that of a raving lunatic. I saw yours as being that of someone who poo-poo'd my question as meaningless. Just because you don't see how something can be done, doesn't mean it can't be done. For whatever it's worth, I agree with you that the likelihood of seeing any statistically significant accident data on the two knots is just about zero. (Don't even get me started on the data collection of the AMA.) However, that's not what I had in mind. Actual personal experiences are data. So are pull tests and drop tests done in labs. I can do some tests myself, but if someone else has done some already, or has a personal experience that could shed light on (for example) the way in which the single bowline failed, that might save me a bit of time.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
scottie_c
Aug 21, 2003, 7:12 PM
Post #48 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2002
Posts: 2
|
you ever take a lead fall on that single bowline?
No, because you would not be here. :shock:
If you insist on using a bowlin as a tie in, use the double with the Yosemite hitch.
I would shoot the person who taught you to tie in with a single...
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 21, 2003, 7:24 PM
Post #49 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Sorry you saw my response as being that of a raving lunatic. I saw yours as being that of someone who poo-poo'd my question as meaningless.
That wasn't my intent. My purpose in pointing out that accident data would likely be unavailable was to dispell the fallacy that lack of data showing one knot to be safer than the other tacitly supports the alternative; ie, that the two knots are equally safe. It is common for people to mistakenly believe that lack of data contradicting the null hypothesis is support for the null hypothesis.
In reply to: Just because you don't see how something can be done, doesn't mean it can't be done.
As a scientist, I am aware of that, which is why I questioned how such data could be collected, rather than stated that it could not.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
csoles
Aug 21, 2003, 8:37 PM
Post #50 of 70
(6312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2002
Posts: 329
|
In reply to: you ever take a lead fall on that single bowline? No, because you would not be here. :shock: If you insist on using a bowlin as a tie in, use the double with the Yosemite hitch. I would shoot the person who taught you to tie in with a single...
Gosh, after 30 years of climbing with a single bowline, it's great to have some newbie tell me it's no good :roll: Clue time: it's as safe as any other tie-in knot and a heck of a lot easier than the other nonsense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
