The "Derived Hitch"

[jcsampson]

This is the edit (in this case, an addendum) to the original first post:

N.B: The original naming scheme was upsetting to some of the readers of this topic and has since been revised.

The basic knot (i.e., the component knot for the set of constructs) is now called the "Fixed-Gripper Knot." The main constructs that have been presented in this thread (i.e., in this topic), and that use the Fixed-Gripper Knot, are now identified as follows:

- The Fixed-Gripper Hitch
- The Fixed-Gripper Binder
- The Fixed-Gripper Coil Hitch
- The Fixed-Gripper Coil Binder
- The Fixed-Gripper Tension Hitch
- The Fixed-Gripper Tension Binder
- The Locked Fixed-Gripper Knot
- The Stopper-Flush Fixed-Gripper Knot
- The Adjustable Fixed-Gripper Coil Hitch
- The Fixed-Gripper Slide-and-Grip Hitch
- The Fixed-Gripper Slide-and-Grip Hitch Variation

Knot diagrams for these constructs can be seen here:

- http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1839.msg12495#msg12495
- http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1839.msg12500#msg12500
- http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1839.msg12509#msg12509
- http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1839.msg12539#msg12539

Because these diagrams were made before the final naming scheme was determined, simply replace the term "Component-Knot" that is found in some of these diagrams by the term "Fixed-Gripper." And for just the first diagram, replace the name "Derived Hitch" by the name "Fixed-Gripper Hitch."

JCS

This is the original first post:

The Derived Hitch

The Derived Hitch is a simple, valuable, and versatile hitch derived from "Two Half Hitches" and "Buntline Hitch." It allows for some of the properties of Two Half Hitches, some of the properties of Buntline Hitch, and, most important, its own unique set of properties. It is surprising that something of such great simplicity and similarity to the two structures from which it has been derived can be as useful, unique, and valuable as it is.

Although the Derived Hitch can be made to a post, its most valuable use is to the rope's standing part to form the Derived-Hitch Loop. And although the Derived-Hitch Loop can function like "Two Half Hitches" or the "Buntline Hitch," the knot's most valuable use is as part of other versatile constructs, such as the "Coil Hitch" and the "Tension Technique." The Coil Hitch is basically an extension of the concept of "Round Turn and Two Half Hitches," but it can be used for binding as well as hitching and can additionally form its own useful constructs, because of its unique properties.

How to make the Derived-Hitch Loop: Make Two Half Hitches and then finish the knot as if you were making a Buntline Hitch. It's that simple. Dress the knot by lining up well the three "coils" on its underside. Tighten the knot by pulling the working end while holding the knot itself and by pulling the loop part while holding the knot itself. You should be able to grab and slide the knot well up and down the standing part, but the knot should exert a noticeable fixed grip on the standing part as it is slid.

A knot diagram for the Derived-Hitch Loop should accompany this post.

Although at first glance the Derived Hitch appears to be ABOK #1739, do not mistake it for that: The PROPER final half hitch in the Derived Hitch is precisely what makes the hitch the valuable knot that it is, with its own unique set of useful properties.

The grip of the Derived Hitch on the rope's standing part is NOT determined by the tension of the line, as it is in knots such as the "Tarbuck Knot," the "Tautline Hitch," or the "Adjustable Grip Hitch." The grip is determined by two things: (1) How tight the Derived Hitch is made on the standing part, and (2) whether there is a "stacking" of two or more Derived Hitches on the standing part. The reason that this situation is valuable in those applications where tension is employed is as follows: As the tension of a line increases, slide-and-grip knots whose grip depends upon the line's tension wind up tightening, thereby making their adjustment for GREATER tension more difficult, until a threshold is reached at which point no greater tension can be achieved. Since the grips of Derived Hitches are not determined by the rope's tension, stacked hitches can CONTINUE to be easily and independently repositioned over the standing part in order to hold greater tension, regardless of how much tension is demanded from the rope. This situation exploits the concept of "perpetual adjustability"--which means that the construct need not be unhitched in order to make tension adjustments, as would be the case when using, say, "Trucker's Hitch"--but without the limitations of slide-and-grip knots.

Using the Derived Hitch, a number of useful constructs can be made:

- The Derived-Hitch Loop
- The Derived-Hitch Coil Hitch (which has two to four "coil rings" and so extends the concept of "Round Turn and Two Half Hitches," but which can function uniquely because of the increased ability to grip)
- The Derived-Hitch Tension Technique
- The Derived-Hitch Wrapping Technique
- The Locked Derived Hitch
- The Stopper-Flush Derived Hitch
- The Coil-Hitch Loop (which is a slide-and-grip loop; it offers a variable grip, as opposed to the fixed grip offered by the Derived Hitch in the Derived-Hitch Loop, which keeps the Derived-Hitch Loop out of the slide-and-grip category)

These constructs should be discussed in detail in future postings.

Other constructs not listed above can be made as well.

The Derived-Hitch Loop and the Derived-Hitch Coil Hitch can both be used for hitching and binding.

A Derived-Hitch Loop or a Derived-Hitch Coil Hitch can be "locked," though each of these constructs is so dependable that locking is rarely necessary. This is not to be confused with "stacking." The preferred method of locking is to use two overhands (in a creative way, which should be shown in a future posting). Another method of locking is to use a second Derived Hitch. Locking a Derived Hitch allows it to function also as a bend--a bend that allows the knotter to "take up the slack" in the line before locking.

Derived Hitches can be "stacked" on a rope's standing part to create the Derived-Hitch Tension Technique and the Derived-Hitch Wrapping Technique. With respect to stacking, in the context of these techniques, the hitch is so effective that a stacking of just two Derived Hitches will usually do the job, and no one should ever need to stack more than three or four. Additionally, stacked Derived Hitches have a way of usefully but gently bending the standing part diagonally at their points of contact, which further increases their ability to grip the line well.

There is no need to have unsightly tails flapping in the breeze: A "Stopper-Flush Derived Hitch," within the context of most of the above constructs, can be made.

Details should be given in future postings.

JCS

[roo]

You need to work on pruning your posts down to the meat of your assertions, for clarity.  Somewhere in your post you stated:

its most valuable use is to the rope's standing part to form the ...Loop.

OK.  Let's evaluate the loop, then.  First, I'm not impressed with its prospects for security, as the final tuck can spring open readily when shaken or flogged while slack, assuming the loop does not collapse down to the object.

Next, when the loop is pulled hard, I find it collapsing down to a minimal size.  This is not a good property for a loop knot.

The grip of the Derived Hitch on the rope's standing part is not determined by the tension of the line, as it is in knots such as the "Tarbuck Knot," the "Tautline Hitch," or the "Adjustable Grip Hitch." The grip is determined by two things: (1) How tight the Derived Hitch is made on the standing part,

But it is determined by the tension in the line, at least partially.  You unwittingly admit this by stating that the knot's tightness helps determine the grip.  Well, the knot does in fact get tighter when there is tension on the line.   This should be obvious.

There is another way in which the line tension affects the knot's grip.  As tension increases, the standing part's diameter decreases, and, as I mentioned earlier, allows the loop knot to collapse down to a minimal size.

and (2) whether there is a "stacking" of two or more Derived Hitches on the standing part.

This isn't an attractive option.   I can find more efficient alternatives.

[Dan_Lehman]

Well, the knot does in fact get tighter when there is tension on the line.   This should be obvious.

I concur in both points, as well as its poor grip qua friction hitch.

This knot is a way to get Buntline security with 2Half-hitches,
and who knows what else might come along with the difference
as a noose hitch.

It is a knot (the knot part, not the overall knotted structure) that
has been used as a *mid-line* hitch for relatively thin line securing
netting to a headline -- arcs between the hitches-to-headline being
run through the edge of the netting.  It can be seen as a Reverse
Grounline Hitch with a HHitch in its midst, or an initial Clove H.
with a closing, on-the-backside Half-hitch.

The Clove h. alone has been so used, and seems better set when
tied in *bunt-line* orientation to the flow of tying:  loading in
this orientation sets the knot ever tighter.

--dl*
====

[jcsampson]

"You need to [prune] your posts . . ."

Yes, the post is on the long-winded side, and I was doing my best to minimize this situation; however, it was necessary to present much information at once, for a variety of reasons, and to do it in what I feel is a "warm" way. This requires--or at least resulted in--a little long-windedness.

". . . when the loop is pulled hard, I find it collapsing down to a minimal size."

The Derived-Hitch Loop is not meant to be used as a fixed loop at the end of a line. When used at the end of a line, it is meant to be used always at minimal size. The loop that results when stacking Derived Hitches, however, in the context of the tension and wrapping techniques, is meant to function as a fixed loop at the end of a line, though the loop remains variable by its being able to be perpetually adjusted.

". . . the final tuck [might] spring open readily when shaken or flogged while slack . . ."

On the contrary, sometimes I have reason to use the traditional Round Turn and Two Half Hitches, but what I will do is to anchor the working end to the standing part using a Derived Hitch, in order to secure the Two Half Hitches. It works wonderfully. I have given this particular arrangement many shake tests over the years, and it holds up noticeably better than anything else that I would want to use to anchor a tail. I have found that--remarkably--even if the DH'S final hitch loosens, it has the uncanny ability not to untie, so it does its intended job. And that's with a tail on the DH flopping around: Make a Stopper-Flush Derived Hitch instead and no concerns will survive.

"But it [IS] determined by the tension in the line, at least partially."

I beg to differ: Though tension in the line will AFFECT rope and all knots to some degree, it does not DETERMINE the grip of the Derived Hitch.

"You unwittingly admit this by stating that the knot's tightness helps determine the grip."

No, I do not: How tight the knot is made BY THE KNOTTER is one of the two actions that DETERMINES the grip of the Derived Hitch. This can be understood by observing that, when tension on the line occurs, the grip of a Derived Hitch will sometimes increase and sometimes not, depending upon several factors. Its grip will not regularly and predictably increase in this manner, as it is neither designed to nor expected to, so it cannot be said that the line's tension DETERMINES the grip. In other words, it is not a slide-and-grip not, because it does not exert a variable grip on the line.

Further, when Derived Hitches are ADEQUATELY stacked by the knotter, they will ALWAYS grip to the point of allowing the variable loop at the end of the line to function as a fixed loop. When DH's are adequately stacked, and tension is placed on the line, the gripping DH's--gripping only because the knotter made them grip--will wind up tugging on and tightening each other. The tightening is not DETERMINED by the tension, it is determined by the "adequate stacking of DH's." If a knotter were to deliberately make all stacked DH's very loose (i.e., fail to stack adequately), tension on the line would neither tighten the DH's nor increase their grip. Try this with a loosely made slide-and-grip knot, and the behavior will be different: It eventually will begin to grip as the friction from the pull actively tightens the knot.

"As tension increases, the standing part's diameter decreases, and, as I mentioned earlier, allows the loop knot to collapse down to a minimal size."

When used at the end of a line, the Derived-Hitch Loop (without stacking) is meant to be used always at minimal size.

"This isn't an attractive option. I can find more efficient alternatives."

This is a very attractive option: It gives the knotter incremental, modular control over the amount of grip, to a great degree. And on the subject of efficiency, there are a number of ways to render a construct that uses stacked DH's efficient.

Much more needs to be said about the constructs that use the Derived Hitch; this will take time. These constructs are not meant to replace others; they are meant only to increase a knotter's options and ability to meet subtle demands. For example, I still have reason to use the Trucker's Hitch. (I'll make a TH using a Butterfly Loop, anchor the TH using Two Half Hitches behind the BL's knot, and secure the tail on the line using a Derived Hitch. And, of course, have a Four-Coil-Ring Derived-Hitch Coil Hitch at the other end.)

I use the D-H L every single day, mostly in the context of binding. Try it for binding and tell me what you think.

JCS

[roo]

The Derived-Hitch Loop is not meant to be used as a fixed loop at the end of a line. When used at the end of a line, it is meant to be used always at minimal size.

A loop not meant to be a loop?  Maybe you should call it a hitch.   Further, you cannot claim to use this as an adjustable loop or as a tensioning mechanism as shown (at the end of a line), since you're now claiming that it's always meant to be used at its minimal size.

I'll give you some time to sort out your new stance.

[Rrok007]

Forgive me if I'm wrong, compared to you guys I'm still applying for my "Novice" badge in the world of knots.

Unless I'm reading the picture on the third post wrong, this "derived hitch" looks like a loop, with a larks head/cow hitch, followed by a half-hitch tied above(or below) it?

Why not just call it a "cow-and-a-half" hitch?

[dfred]

I use the D-H L every single day, mostly in the context of binding. Try it for binding and tell me what you think.

Just a side note, since it hasn't been specifically mentioned, a similar construction using a "reversed" adjustable hitch (#1800) is shown under inconsistent names as #192 (binder, as a corn beef knot variant), #1230 (binder) , #1727(hitch), and #1994(both).   The term "reversed", in this case, being used in the same sense that a buntline hitch is two half-hitches reversed.
 

[jcsampson]

". . . you're now claiming that it's always meant to be used at its minimal size."

I realize that there is a lot of information to be digested. The pronoun "it," in your above quote, refers to the "Derived-Hitch Loop." The pronoun does not refer to the OTHER loop (more on this below).

The first part of what I said pertains to the "Derived-Hitch Loop." Then, immediately after I said that, I said this:

"The loop that results when stacking Derived Hitches, however, in the context of the tension and wrapping techniques, is meant to function as a fixed loop at the end of a line, though the loop remains variable by its being able to be perpetually adjusted."

Since I said both of these things, right next to each other, I am NOT "now" claiming anything.

And later in the same post I said, "When used at the end of a line, the Derived-Hitch Loop (without stacking) is meant to be used always at minimal size."

Relax!

Have you tried the Derived-Hitch Loop in the context of binding? You might like it; it's a really great knot. I'm SHARING it with you. Enjoy it!

JCS

[jcsampson]

". . . looks like a loop, with a larks head/cow hitch . . ."

The shading of the picture in my second post (the file DrvdHtchLp100526nw13451.jpg) is a little poor in a crucial spot because of the particular angle of the view; so, I can see why you might perceive a cow hitch instead.

But it actually is a Clove Hitch on the standing part--or Two Half Hitches--before the final Half Hitch.

JCS

[jcsampson]

". . . #1230 . . ."

#192 looks like a running version of #1994.

#1800 is described as a Midshipman's Hitch with the final hitch reversed, but I followed his illustration exactly and got a "reverse p" Midshipman's Hitch instead. Hmmm.

#1230 appears to be an UPSIDE-DOWN Midshipman's Hitch and is an excellent example of the way to use the Derived-Hitch Loop for binding. You will likely find that the D-H L will hold your "samples" much better.

When an application demands more gripping power, there are two options:

- Use a Two-, Three-, or Four-Coil-Ring Derived-Hitch Coil Hitch for Binding (which I will one day post an explanation and picture of)
- Use the Derived-Hitch Wrapping Technique (which I will one day post an explanation and picture of)

#1727 looks like a backwards version (a "reverse p" type) of #1230 (a "p" type) with a different name.

#1994 looks like a backwards version (a "reverse p" type) of #1230 (a "p" type) with a different name, too. In other words, #1994 looks exactly like #1727, but with a different name.

Gotta love the ABOK.

JCS

[dfred]

#192 looks like a running version of #1994.

#1800 is described as a Midshipman's Hitch with the final hitch reversed, but I followed his illustration exactly and got a "reverse p" Midshipman's Hitch instead. Hmmm.

#1230 appears to be an UPSIDE-DOWN Midshipman's Hitch and is an excellent example of the way to use the Derived-Hitch Loop for binding. You will likely find that the D-H L will hold your "samples" much better.

When an application demands more gripping power, there are two options:

- Use a Two-, Three-, or Four-Coil-Ring Derived-Hitch Coil Hitch for Binding (which I will one day post an explanation and picture of)
- Use the Derived-Hitch Wrapping Technique (which I will one day post an explanation and picture of)

#1727 looks like a backwards version (a "reverse p" type) of #1230 (a "p" type) with a different name.

#1994 looks like a backwards version (a "reverse p" type) of #1230 (a "p" type) with a different name, too. In other words, #1994 looks exactly like #1727, but with a different name.

#192: Yes, exactly.  In the same way #191 is a running buntline hitch.

#1800:  Check the illustration and description again.  Actually #1800 and #1800-reversed are distinct.  The key phrase is "If the concluding hitch..."   See #1857.

#1230: I completely concur with using "upside-down" for this, if only to avoid the contextually overloaded term reversed.  I tried to clarify with my final comment, but I should have used a different word for this.

Given the inconsistent naming, the ABOK index was not particularly helpful.  There may still be more examples than my cursory check revealed.

[jcsampson]

I have been thinking about the terminology issue that roo brought up. Perhaps these perspectives will help:

- The Clove Hitch is a hitch
- Two Half Hitches is a variable loop that is used for hitching
- The Buntline Hitch is a variable loop that is used for hitching
- The Bowline is a fixed loop
- The Derived Hitch is a hitch
- The Derived-Hitch Loop is a variable loop that is used for hitching AND binding
- The Stacked Derived-Hitch Loop is a variable loop that is used as a fixed loop
- The Derived-Hitch Coil Hitch is a hitch
- The Derived-Hitch Coil Hitch for Binding is derived from a hitch and used for binding
- The Coil-Hitch Loop is a variable slide-and-grip loop that is used as a fixed loop

JCS

[Dan_Lehman]

The Derived Hitch [which " the Derived Hitch can be made to a post"] is a simple, valuable, and versatile hitch derived from "Two Half Hitches" and "Buntline Hitch."
It has some of the properties of Two Half Hitches, some of the properties of Buntline Hitch, ...

It is no such thing:  it's a Clove Hitch extended with a crossing Half-hitch.
(The cited knots above are noose hitches -- a point made earlier today yourself.)

It is surprising that something of such great simplicity and similarity to the two knots from which it has been derived can be as useful, unique, and valuable as it is.

To say the least!

Since the grips of Derived Hitches are not determined by the rope's tension, stacked hitches can CONTINUE to be easily and independently repositioned over the standing part in order to hold greater tension, regardless of how much tension is demanded from the rope. This situation exploits the concept of "perpetual adjustability"--which means that the construct need not be unhitched in order to make tension adjustments, as would be the case when using, say, "Trucker's Hitch"--but without the limitations of slide-and-grip knots.

I must wonder what you're smoking (I do NOT want any)!!
Clearly you've not been in contact with actual rope and real-world
circumstances to make such assertions!

--dl*
====

[roo]

- The Clove Hitch is a hitch

Yes.

-

Two Half Hitches is a variable loop that is used for hitching

No.  It is a hitch that is used for hitching.

- The Buntline Hitch is a variable loop that is used for hitching

No, still just a hitch.

- The Bowline is a fixed loop

The Bowline is a loop.

- The Derived-Hitch Loop is a variable loop that is used for hitching AND binding

No, it is a hitch or a binder, since you claim that it is always used at its minimal size.  Forget about calling it a loop, and don't compare it to loops or adjustable loops.  Compare it to other collapsing hitches.

http://notableknotindex.webs.com/glossary.html

JC, you are new to the world of knots.  Take some time to read.  Read the ABoK, as you are doing.  Read this forum.  Read rec.crafts.knots.  Buy different rope types and experiment with knots.  Sure, ask some questions, as needed, but take a break from making presentation-style posts for a while.  The investment of time will be well worth it.

[jcsampson]

". . . no such thing . . ."

"Take some time to read."

I wouldn't trade the Derived Hitch and its constructs for any others. They are spectacular structures that have served me well for years. I am very pleased to have an opportunity to share them with those who appreciate knots; but, perhaps I came to the wrong place.

(I once went to a college to learn what it is that I wanted to learn: So there I stood in the middle of the Math Lab while those in charge laughed at me for asking questions and for not already knowing what it is that I went there to learn. After that experience, I realized that very little should ever be expected from humanity--and that I must have gone to the wrong place.)

You have made your disparaging remarks at a time before I have fully demonstrated the Derived Hitch and its constructs; therefore, how can anyone take your comments seriously?

JCS