True Adjustable Loop Knot or TALK for short

[Twine]

* A U-shaped segment of a tensioned loop makes the adjustment a two-step, and somewhat more difficult process. I prefer an L-shaped "handle".

I have to admit that I didn't understand your U-shape and L-shape distinctions, but now I have played around a bit with Oneloneknot's TALK knot, compared it to the Slippery 8 and the Guyline knot, and I think I see what you mean. The Slippery Eight and the Guyline both have these U-shapes, while the TALK knot (AKA the Figure Eight Throat Tie) has the L-shape, right?

[xarax]

   Right. I should perhaps had said "upside down" U, and "upside down" L - but what is "up" and what is "down" ? 
   A U-shaped continuation of the returning eye leg is more secure, regarding slippage, but an L-shaped one can be adjusted more easily. I believe that it is difficult to achieve a U-shaped turn which, when we pull the Tail End in order to adjust the loop, is not too tightly nipped into the surrounding nub ( unless the nub is O-shaped at the tip / point of the turn, that is, unless we use an open bight, like the one we use in the Trucker s hitch ). Anyway, if the nub is tight enough ( as it happens in the case of the Pretzel loop ) even an L-shaped segment can be griped, "locked" and immobilized, very efficiently. 

[Dan_Lehman]

Again, not my Knot.  It is tied completely different and does not look the same once pulled tight.

It is tied exactly like what you (we) present, ...
--dl*
====

... post my pics elsewhere and simply put a link to them ...

[ which was done, as noted by the OP :
To see a step by step pictorial of how I tie the TALK go here
 http://trueadjustableloopknot.blogspot.com/

NB : A typo renders this the "TURE ... Knot".   
]

Your images above are perfectly clear, as is the one URLinked
to of this forum by me, and that cited in EKFR
--there is no ambiguity as far as the starting structure of the knots is
concerned, nor in your & my case of the drawn-up & set
knot.  And this should be clear to you, too!  (The book doesn't
show clear loading : it's two ends are of equal length and seized
--presumably seized for keeping in place for photography--;
and the brief verbal entry for this knot is typical nonsense for
this book.)
--dl*
====

Looks like Oneloneknot doesn't believe you or anyone else who tells him
that his knot is published already. Such scepticism is not an unreasonable
attitude for anyone who reads posts in an Internet forum.  But perhaps
he could be convinced if you were to post a photo or a scan of that
"Figure Eight Throat Tie" figure in the Encyclopedia of Knots and Fancy Ropework.
"Seeing is believing", as they say.

/Twine

But we have more *local* sights, as I noted above (in bold),
with a URLink to my own images & knot.  (My old findings
in notebooks pretty well suggest that I did NOT realize
how secure the knot the OP presents is --in that in the
cases I found, I had run the tail back through the body
for presumed needed security!  I didn't find where I first
made what I call the "quick8" --the OP's knot.

(There is a difference in the orientation (top/bottom, so to speak)
of the knot's image in EKFR, which might be what has
deflected the OP from realizing the match.  Beyond that, as I noted,
"Hansel & Gretel" give no helpful information about its actual use
& loading (--"a figure of 8 knot tied through the bight ..." :: huh???!)

BTW, I was unable --from one system-- to see the references that
Roo cited, so don't know what images (or not) are present there.)


--dl*
====

[Dan_Lehman]

It is tied exactly like what you (we) present, ...
--dl*
====

Hi Dan! Looks like Oneloneknot doesn't believe you or anyone else who tells him
that his knot is published already.

Let me be perspicuous* re this :: OneLoneKnot has discovered
for/by himself a pretty neat/good knot !!  --no matter where
it might have resided unknown to him (et al.).  I think that
I might've gotten there first, but what does that matter,
if so?  I'm sure that when I first got to that *neighborhood*
I did NOT recognize this knot as such, and thought to further
tuck the tail.  I'm more happy that we both found it, and it has
seen light --extra light via his efforts, I think!

Let me add that the tail of the OP's knot can be tucked
back into the knot between the eye legs at their entry,
and snugged down to be fairly secure-when-slack
--with assured security when (normally --not "ring-"-- loaded).
(This particular tucking came with my realization of the OP's
knot whenever that was; the earlier re-tucking was to make
a bowlinesque collar, which I thought was necessary,
whereas for the latter tucking I was deliberately seeking
not in-load-security but slack-security.)


--dl*
====

[*Yes, "perspicuous" : use it or lose it! ]

[Twine]

But we have more *local* sights, as I noted above (in bold),
with a URLink to my own images & knot. 

But your knots at that URL, http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3810.msg22474#msg22474  are not adjustable loops, they are fixed eyes, so they're not the same, neither in function nor geometry, as the knot of the OP. Thus, they don't constitute prior publication.

(My old findings
in notebooks pretty well suggest that I did NOT realize
how secure the knot the OP presents is --in that in the
cases I found, I had run the tail back through the body
for presumed needed security!  I didn't find where I first
made what I call the "quick8" --the OP's knot.

Are you saying that your discovery of the Quick8 (if it really is the same as the adjustable loop the OP calls TALK, which is hard to determine due to lack of picture or description of Quick8) pre-dates his discovery? I seem to recall reading of a knot by the name of Quick8 somewhere, so you may well have a point, but I can't seem to find it anywhere right now.

Oh, I found a description of it now. Inside a parenthesis in your post at
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3810.msg22474#msg22474
which I quote here:

I'll attach photos to this post of what
I proudly name the "Lehman8" and --hmmm-- "Collared8"
(to which knots' common mid-state of completion lies what I
call the "Quick8" and then "tucked Quick8"

A picture would have been better, but okay, what you describe (and do not depict) must be the same as what Oneloneknot calls the TALK knot, so the structure wasn't new. But did you also come up with the idea of using it to make an adjustable eye?

(There is a difference in the orientation (top/bottom, so to speak)
of the knot's image in EKFR, which might be what has
deflected the OP from realizing the match.  Beyond that, as I noted,
"Hansel & Gretel" give no helpful information about its actual use
& loading (--"a figure of 8 knot tied through the bight ..." :: huh???!)

"a figure of 8 knot tied through the bight ..."    Heh. A very strange description. And that's all they had? And did you say that in their illustration the end was seized to the standing part? To me, that makes it obvious they didn't mean it as an adjustable loop.

BTW, I was unable --from one system-- to see the references that
Roo cited, so don't know what images (or not) are present there.)

I followed Roo's link to the usenet post depicting the Slippery 8, and I arrived at a horrible jumble maning nothing. Turns out that Dave Poston had made some ASCII art to show his knot, but ASCII art turns to a mess when viewed with a proportional font. (See attached picture)
I copied it into Notepad and took a screenshot of it, and it shows a clearer picture. (See the other attached picture)

Note to Oneloneknot: The pictures show (or attempt to show) the Slippery 8; it is NOT the same knot as yours, but it shows a somewhat similar structure. The difference is that in the TALK knot the working end is reeved through the figure 8 in the opposite direction. Personally, I find the TALK a marvel of simplicity, and I happen to agree with Leonardo da Vinci who said that "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication."

/Twine

[Twine]

Let me be perspicuous* re this :: OneLoneKnot has discovered
for/by himself a pretty neat/good knot !!  --no matter where
it might have resided unknown to him (et al.).  I think that
I might've gotten there first, but what does that matter,
if so?  I'm sure that when I first got to that *neighborhood*
I did NOT recognize this knot as such, and thought to further
tuck the tail.  I'm more happy that we both found it, and it has
seen light --extra light via his efforts, I think!

Let me add that the tail of the OP's knot can be tucked
back into the knot between the eye legs at their entry,
and snugged down to be fairly secure-when-slack
--with assured security when (normally --not "ring-"-- loaded).
(This particular tucking came with my realization of the OP's
knot whenever that was; the earlier re-tucking was to make
a bowlinesque collar, which I thought was necessary,
whereas for the latter tucking I was deliberately seeking
not in-load-security but slack-security.)


--dl*
====

[*Yes, "perspicuous" : use it or lose it! ]

The word perspicuous isn't very perspicuous to me; I had to look it up.

I can easily imagine that you or many other knot-tiers of IGKT have come up with the fairly simple structure of the TALK, but I think Oneloneknot at least should be honored with discovering how surprisingly strong and secure it is while using it as an adjustable eye for kites. I imagine that kite string is very strong and slippery, like monofilament, but I may be wrong, of course.

Let me add that the tail of the OP's knot can be tucked
back into the knot between the eye legs at their entry,
and snugged down to be fairly secure-when-slack

But the whole point of this knot is that it is easily adjustable. That property is ruined by your extra tuck! Instead, you could tie a stopper knot on the tail. That would keep the adjustability, but prevent the knot from coming undone.

/Twine

[roo]

This loop knot came up in the original discussions on rec.crafts.knots on the HFP Slippery 8 Loop:

Just thought I'd put in my two cents worth.

I found a knot that looks very much like the knot seen here. It's
published in Graumont & Hensell "Encyclopedia of knots and fancy rope
work" as the figure of eight throat tie (page 97, plate 45 knot 308 --in
my first edition I don't know about current numbers etc.). There is
however a difference between that knot and the present one. The  end
forming the loop passes through the figure of eight knot from the other
side (i.e. in present knot standing end and running end lie on opposite
sides of knot, in figure of eight throat knot the standing end and
running end lie on the same side). I think the debate should focus on
whether this modification justifies a new name.

John Walker

Attached is #308 from the Encyclopedia of Knots and Fancy Ropework and it is the same as the "TALK" knot.  The book calls it the Figure-of-Eight Throat or Emergency Tie, but gives little indication of any real evaluation of it and stupidly fails to indicate which end is the standing part.  But this is a visual indication of what was being discussed relative to the the Slippery Eight Loop in rec.crafts.knots.

[Twine]

Attached is #308 from the Encyclopedia of Knots and Fancy Ropework and it is the same as the "TALK" knot.  The book calls it the Figure-of-Eight Throat or Emergency Tie, but gives little indication of any real evaluation of it and stupidly fails to indicate which end is the standing part.  But this is a visual indication of what was being discussed relative to the the Slippery Eight Loop in rec.crafts.knots.

Thanks for providing the picture, Roo. The picture shows that the authors of the Encyclopedia had no understanding of the knot. I can imagine no practical use for the seized form as shown. And what do they mean by Throat Tie? Am I supposed to use it to tie my scarf or my necktie? (Maybe not a bad idea, come to think of it, but do I really want to seize the ends of my scarf together?) And "Emergency Tie" is quite ambiguos too. What emergency? A fire, a car accident, a robbery, an asthma attack or what? So since the Encyclopedists fail to say anything instructive about it, we must assume they copied it from some other source. If they had invented it themselves they would have had more to say about it.

By the age of the Encyclopedia in question, we can determine that the knot was discovered some time before 1943. Therefore, both Dan and Oneloneknot have independently discovered or invented this knot, but were probaly not the first to do so. Since it already has the name Quick8, I think we should keep that name, and not add the name TALK as well. The names in the Encyclopedia of Knots and Fancy Ropework are possibly misleading, so even if they are older, I would not advocate their use.

I found a post in this forum (http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4965.msg32752#msg32752) where Dan explicitly speaks of the Quick8 as an adjustable loop, so we see that Dan and Oneloneknot are not only speaking of exactly the same structure, but also have the same usage in mind.

I think we must conclude that Dan Lehman's publication of the knot predates Oneloneknot's, but that there may well exist an earlier publication, which the Encyclopedia writers have looked at, misunderstood and simply copied.

/Twine

[oneloneknot]

Sadly, which leaves me heartbroken (I knew that I could not have invented a new knot) that EKRW308, which I think you all are calling the "Quick 8" is a LEFT HAND version of my TALK and is tied exactly like I tie a left handed TALK.  Thanks for all your time and effort on my behalf.

-John

[Twine]

Don't be sad, Oneloneknot! At least you have discovered a great knot. Not everyone can do that. The greatest thing about inventing a knot isn't really some kind of fame and glory from being the first discoverer of it, but the pride and joy in one's own creativity and inventiveness. Also, you shouldn't be surprised that Dan Lehman found it before you, because he's a genius at knot-tying. I don't think he is sad about not being the first to think of the structure of the Quick8.

Me, I have *never* come up with a new, good knot by myself. My last attempt was to lock two half-hitches in the same way as Xarax (another genius knot-tyer on these boards -- we have lots of them) locked a cow-hitch, i.e. by a single tuck of the end under the rest of the hitch. But it turned out that his locked cow hitch was better, because it both grips harder and is easier to untie. Anyway, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Xarax or someone else has already tried that hitch and found it lacking. Every knot I use regularly is invented by someone else, it seems. Does that make me sad? No, I take great comfort in just knowing many knots so I can try to pick the best for each purpose and be fairly sure it isn't a bad knot.

The adjustable figure of 8 loop, Quick8, is both neat and practical, and I'm grateful that you brought it to my attention, because I had never seen it before. Well, I may have seen Dan's description, but a wordy description without illustration doesn't often inspire me to try tying a knot to see what it's like. But I'll remember it now, and I think I shall often use it when I need an adjustable loop from now on.

What kind of string do you use with the kites? Is it something like Kevlar?

/Twine

[Dan_Lehman]

Sadly, which leaves me heartbroken (I knew that I could not have invented a new knot) that EKRW308, which I think you all are calling the "Quick 8" is a LEFT HAND version of my TALK and is tied exactly like I tie a left handed TALK.  Thanks for all your time and effort on my behalf.

-John

It's not at all clear what "Hansel & Gretel" intended,
or if they had any real intent at all --really, so MUCH
of that book is just like this, with even absurd knots
and just nothing for verbal explanation!!!  (And what
can we attribute the resounding silence about this book
to?  What does that say of its readers?!)

Indeed, one might presume that, insofar as H&G say
that it's a "quick" way of attachment, that they probably
mean for it to be taken as a HITCH --one doesn't tediously
form a fig.8 and then carefully reeve the tail through,
to form the quick8, but rather one quickly turns the line
around the to-be-hitched object and then ties a fig.8 hitch
to the line (making a noose-hitch)!

And, so, you have seen what they did not, and what I did not
when I had gotten just so far but felt that I wasn't done.
Only later did I realize the "quick8" viability.
Moreover, you've put the knot to good use.  (I've tested the
re-tucked knot, in Dyneema 5/16" rope, one specimen with
the knot at both ends, so one survived.)


--dl*
====

[roo]

Sadly, which leaves me heartbroken (I knew that I could not have invented a new knot) that EKRW308, which I think you all are calling the "Quick 8" is a LEFT HAND version of my TALK and is tied exactly like I tie a left handed TALK.  Thanks for all your time and effort on my behalf.

-John

It's not at all clear what "Hansel & Gretel" intended,

I did try reversing the standing part and free end, and it causes some drastic form changes that would seem to preclude the alternate loading as the intended form.  The book's level of clarity does leave much to be desired.

[Dan_Lehman]

...
It's not at all clear what "Hansel & Gretel" intended,

I did try reversing the standing part and free end, and it causes some drastic form changes that would seem to preclude the alternate loading as the intended form.  The book's level of clarity does leave much to be desired.

Firstly, thanks for posting the book's image.
And we can match that generally to ABOK's #1116,
a noose-hitch (but H&G give no verbal hint of "noose").

Secondly, the underscored assertion is just WAY too kind:
the book is absolutely bonkers in sooo many places --it's
a good way to get a laugh, but in so doing, one --again--
must wonder how the book survives and without any
such harsh indictment as I'm (belatedly, I'm abashed to
acknowledge) giving now !!  --this book preceded ABOK,
after all, and has gone through at least 4 editions.

(Just one of the many comic gems taken from the region
of this book under discussion now:

The Combination Square Knot Hitch has a hitch tied through
a Combination Square Knot.

--for #311, which shows what can be described as a square
knot with tails brought across respective S.Parts to become
fused on the outside of the S.Parts's crossing (and by fusion
rendering this a knot in a single strand, not end-2-end).
--looks like an overhand where the "belly" (Asher's term) forms
a turNip (you-know-who's) around the crossing part.
And I find no reference for "C.S.K.", the referred-to knot
(as though someone should/could know what this is).
.:.  Truly appalling --both the book AND the lack of criticism,
the continued publishing!!)


--dl*
====

[Dan_Lehman]

Sadly, which leaves me heartbroken
 (I knew that I could not have invented a new knot)
that EKRW308, which I think you all are calling the "Quick 8" is a LEFT HAND
version of my TALK and is tied exactly like I tie a left handed TALK.
Thanks for all your time and effort on my behalf.

-John

I will again say that the EKFR presentation is vague, and
so not clearly a prior discovery, although the knotting
is the same --it's a question of loading, and of function.

But I now see that the OP's goal was previously realized
in a presentation in Knotting Matters (KM) #10, p.13 of
a letter dated 1984-10-23, in which the similar structure
but with a round turn in the *front of the fig.8*
is shown and advocated qua "adjustable dog's lead" (I'm
not sure what one is supposed to do with much tail
"adjusted" out in shrinking an eye!?).  As with the
round turn in a double bowline, the turn put into
the fig.8 (which makes it a "fig.10" --oriented in
the "reverse" way) can be dressed in various ways.

OR WAIT ... , even here it might be otherwise, as I'm
now realizing that there's ambiguity in the illustration
and text as to how this is to be loaded!  I think that
it might be taken like the crabber's eye, in which the
final setting of the knot --at that point, really a noose-hitch
(hitching tail to S.Part)-- puts a hard bend into the S.Part
and fairly well locks the knot into position, creating
a "fixed" eye (loop).  This working makes sense of the
text about adjustability, and is more apt for "hitch".

SOoooo, so close yet so far.
.:.  IMO, only I have clearly discovered the OP's knot
(prior or knot, we may leave unknown; but independently),
which shows a nice, gripping aspect of the fig.8.
And OneLoneKnot has put the knot to good use and
advocated for it, and I have had one variant tested
to rupture, in strong rope.

--dl*
====

[jarnos]

When in use on a train line, or a bridle line or a flight line, the more the force on the line, the tighter the knot becomes.  If the knot is tied in very thin line and too much tension is place on the line, it becomes impossible to untie.  I have not tested it to the point of destruction as I do not have the money or means to do so.  But I stand by my knot and win or lose I will but it up to all other adjustable loop knot tied in the same line.

Alan Lee's figure 8 based adjustable loop seems to be easier to untie, if tension is released first.
https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=6822.msg45029#msg45029 (referring to the V 1 and the TIB version)
https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=5383.msg36402#msg36402 (Older post from June 2015)