Did I just accidentally tie a Carrick Loop?

[MkT]

Playing around with cord the other day, I tied a constrictor knot loosely around my finger, then removed it from my finger.  The free end was then fed through the loose constrictor opening that my finger previously occupied.  This formed a loop.  With one hand gripping the standing end and the other on the loop, I pulled tightly so that the constrictor tightened down.  To my delight, the loop held nicely.  Teasing it apart so that the knot loosened, de-contorted, and flattened out, I noticed what looked like a Carrick pattern.  Did I just accidentally tie a Carrick loop or some variant? And is anyone familiar with this constrictor method of tying it?  All I have seen prior to this is the bowline method.  Thanks.

[Dan_Lehman]

The free end was then fed through the loose constrictor opening that my finger previously occupied.  This formed a loop.

There are two directions in which the insertion
can be made : in one, one gets what I once
christened "the anti-bowline"
 --as the direction of insertion is opposite/anti
   what would be for the bowline--
and in the other direction one gets the "myrtle" eye knot.
Both of these knots benefit greatly from having
a 2nd turn & insertion of the tail, putting then
three diameters within the SPart's nipping loop.

I don't see a resemblance to the common, lattice-form
of the carrick bend!?


--dl*
====

[MkT]

Thanks for your reply. I will try to post clarifying photos of what I mean.

[MkT]

  Photos promised

[agent_smith]

Thanks for posting in this forum MkT,

I have to comment that your photos are of such poor quality, that even if I consumed 10 bunches of carrots per day and did eye exercises for a month - I would still have trouble viewing your photos   (tongue in cheek bad humor).

Anyhow, by working some computer magic and trying to enlarge and enhance a horrible image, I can say that your last image is not a #1439 derived Carrick eye knot.
Dan Lehman is correct, what you had created is a 'Myrtle' with S/Z chirality.

I have attached an image of the #1439 derived Carrick eye knot for your reference.
As a comparison, I have also attached #1033 'Carrick loop' - which actually does not have the carrick mat geometry and in my view was incorrectly named by Ashley.
It should be renamed #1033 Carrick loop Bowline, or #1033 Carrick Bowline (or just #1033 Bowline variant).

[MkT]

On the positive side, Thank you DL and A_S both for letting me know about the Myrtle which is new to me and I appreciate your time. You both seem to be very experienced and I can visualize the distinction between Carrick and Myrtle now.

 File size restrictions limited the photo quality. 
Maybe you should eat more carrots because I could see the photo details just fine (albeit not great quality, but doable.) 🤭

[agent_smith]

Your nearly two paragraphs of complaint of how you had to do your computer ?magic? to remedy the situation was snooty and bordered on trolling.   Nice introduction to the IGKT.

I think you are way over-reacting to a tongue-in-cheek comment.
We are here to help - and help we did.
No need to advance a personal insult.

Be that as it may - I will try to eat more carrots

By the way, I like that you have been investigating the #1188 Constrictor hitch - I have been thinking about it myself lately, and how it fits as a 'nipping structure' in a 'Bowline'.
Its quite an interesting derivative of the Clove hitch - and the addition of a simple overlap/tuck transforms the Clove hitch into something that cinches exceedingly well.

[MkT]

I wove a pair of snowshoes using 90 lb. test ( very thick and stiff) monofilament using constrictor hitches at some points.  There were some places on the frames that were not convex enough for the constrictor to hold well enough. So I became interested in modifying the constrictor hitch so there are more friction points to possibly stay tight on less convex surfaces or even perhaps flat surfaces.  Tried  a couple variations that appeared to me at least to constrict a small hard cover book a bit better than when using the unmodified hitch.  In playing with this,  I used the end method to tie a constrictor on my finger producing an X configuration. Instead of continuing in the normal way, however, I  tried inserting an overhand knot (also tried a double surgeon?s knot a different time) at the point where the X crosses, and then finished the modified. constrictor in the usual way.  At first glance,  it seemed to work OK.  But I didn?t do any further tests to confirm.
I would be pleased to learn what others have discovered about this hitch or known modifications. Thanks.

[agent_smith]

In playing with this,  I used the end method to tie a constrictor on my finger producing an X configuration. Instead of continuing in the normal way, however, I  tried inserting an overhand knot (also tried a double surgeon?s knot a different time) at the point where the X crosses, and then finished the modified. constrictor in the usual way.

Can you post some photos - I'm interested...

[MkT]

photos

[MkT]

Error in my previous description.  Poor memory of last year's snowshoe constrictor hitch modification.   I did not use overhand nor surgeon knots for modifying as I previously erroneously stated.  I simply wrapped cord around cord then finished the constrictor as shown in the photos.  I also tried doing the wrapping a second way (photos of this will follow.)  Both ways appear to constrict and grip the rectangular case of a TI-84 calculator fairly well, even though the case is slick.

[MkT]

Alternate wrapping.