Bowline and Eskimo bowline, just the same

[Ruby]

Sometimes I wondered what's an Eskimo bowline,
And what's the difference with common bowline,

Today I suddenly realized that they are almost same knot.

The tying method is exactly the same method as #1010

So just rotate a bowline , or load it by the tail leg,
it becomes an Eskimo bowline.

Maybe it's obvious, I just find it very interesting .

[Dan_Lehman]

Sometimes I wondered what's an Eskimo bowline,
And what's the difference with common bowline,

Today I suddenly realized that they are almost same knot.

The tying method is exactly the same method as #1010

So just rotate a bowline , or load it by the tail leg,
it becomes an Eskimo bowline.

Maybe it's obvious, I just find it very interesting .

It apparently is yet to be obvious to you --you do not
"load it by the tail leg".  The bowline is to the (same-side)
sheet bend as the eskimo bowline is to the lapp bend.
Tying methods will differ, in order to achieve the different knots.
(But the knots' nubs/bodies could be illustrated in much the
same way --could share that part of the illustration!)


--dl*
====

[Ruby]

It apparently is yet to be obvious to you

no , it's not obvious to me.  I just find it today. and I thought maybe it's obvious to someone else.

you do not "load it by the tail leg".

no. actually it's loaded by the Spart leg.
 and , then , need to cut the loop and reconnect the old SPart and tail leg

Tying methods will differ, in order to achieve the different knots.

in order to achieve the two different knots ,
 I just find the tying methods happen to be the same.

the knots' nubs/bodies could be illustrated in much the
same way --could share that part of the illustration!

yes ,  I think  the knots' nubs/bodies is just the same

[Ruby]

in common bowline quick method as ABoK 1010 , the ring or pole is on the ground

but

sometimes the ring or pole to tie a bowline around is over head,
and then using this same method to tie a bowline,
we just get an Eskimo bowline

same method

[Ruby]

when the object to tie around is over head,

some knot books suggest that first tie a overhand knot

and then pull down the tail to capsize into a loop , and then continue to tie a bowline

I think this method is too much work.

using above  same 1010 method, just tie an Eskimo bowline,  and it's still a good knot. maybe better.

[X1]

   As said the other day, this is not the worst form of the "Eskimo" bowline, but it is not the best either.
   I guess I have to explain it a little more... The thing we are most afraid of, is the deformation and the "opening" of the bowline s nipping loop. If what prevents this is the continuation of the tail-side eye leg, and not the tail itself, any action that will tend to separate the two limbs of the nipping loop will not tend to pull the tail out...
   The best form of the "Eskimo" bowline, where the tail does not play any direct role in preventing the "opening" of the nipping loop, while, at the same time, it is squeezed underneath its own continuation, is the form shown at the attached pictures.
   Read also : 
   http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4175

[Ruby]

so the knot I posted is not an Eskimo bowline?

I think I　didn't see it in ABoK, so I don't know the standard Esmimo bwl,
and I'm wrong....


any way, no big diffrence.
if an Eskimo bowline is like what you two pointed out,
then ,

it's nub is same with a left handed bowline, ABoK 1034 1/2


the tying method is still almost the same with #1010

just around the SPART leg in another direction.

[X1]

   so the knot I posted is not an Eskimo bowline?

   It is an "Eskimo" bowline, it is not the "Eskimo" bowline, simply because there is no such a (one) thing : there are four of them ! 

See : http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4175

[Ruby]

ok , I just find  that what 75RR and X1 posted is different knot.

75RR's Eskimo is like the left handed bowline #1034 1/2


and X1's Eskimo bowline is just same as  common bowline #1010


and,  to get what X1 suggested,  after tying as I posted, need a little additional dressing.

that is , to rotate the tail around the tail leg  90 degrees, the lock it with the SPart's entrance first curve

then , it's the same knot as X1 posted.

[Ruby]

after dressed  , I think it's the same with that locked Eskimo

tie a bowline



move tail a little



tightened

[X1]

   Ruby, 75RR, give it another try ! 
   It is NOT the same knot, obviously ! Tie all the four (4) variations of the "Eskimo" bowline, and you will see it.
   In two variations the working end collars the standing part s side eye leg turning clockwise, and in the other two turning counter-clockwise.
   In two variations the tail goes under the tail s side eye leg, and in the other two over it. 
   ( It is not "a little additional dressing" , it is a different dressing - which enhances the security of the knot, because it places the tail UNDER the continuation of the eye leg, in direct contact with the standing part s first curve ).

With the Eskimo under load i.e. "working", I see no difference in whether the tail is above or below the Eye Leg of the Bight.

   The exact opposite is true !    : With the Eskimo unloaded, i.e. "not working", I see no difference in whether the tail is above or below the Eye Leg of the Bight.

[Ruby]

   It is NOT the same knot, obviously !

well, sure not. really obviously. I'm just saying about the tying method

 
It is not "a little additional dressing" , it is a different dressing ...

different. with little diffference. in look only.
well, anyway , the dressed result I posted is the same locked Eskimo as you posted , right?




if right, then no problem.   carefully dressing is always required

like tying carrick bend or tying bowline using a slip overhand to capsize into the final result
there's always careful dressing needed.

[X1]

   I'm just saying about the tying method

   I believe that, if it is difficult to tell the differences between knots, it is much more difficult to tell the difference between tying methods !
   What a person could perceive as "similar", to another it would seem altogether different... If we find difficult to tell if two spatial arrangements / knots are different or not, imagine how difficult it would become when we will consider two sequences of moves, i.e.two spatiotemporal arrangements / tying methods !  Where there are also elements that are not shown in the final picture : the FINGERS of the knot tyer ! 

the dressed result I posted is the same locked Eskimo as you posted , right?

  Right, obviously  . However, in your previous post(s) where the bowline is tied around the pole, the standing end is coming from "below", while in this more common view, it comes from "above". I think it would be better / easier to us, the viewers, if, when you publish a series of pictures, you keep the same orientation of the standing end, even when you show the "front" and the "back" view of the same knot. I have also to notice that those "red" and "orange" ropes are, for pictures, even worse than my "green" one !  I think it would be better if you use a round, smooth monochrome rope ...

[X1]

Widen that loop !

  How much ?  Even when you will widen it enough, you would nt find yourself in the situation you describe : "... the tail is above or below the Eye Leg of the Bight." You will tie an "Eskimo" bowline where the tail would be on the side of its continuation, neither "above" nor "below" it. So, this statement

With the Eskimo under load i.e. "working", I see no difference in whether the tail is above or below the Eye Leg of the Bight.

is wrong, the one way or the other... In a loaded knot, if the first segment is "below" the second, and the second is "above" the first, it does matter which is the tail and which is the tail-side eye leg, the continuation of the tail.

[X1]

   I believe that the tail will remain "above" or "below" its continuation / the tail side eye leg, even in this 90-120 degrees "Eskimo" bowline you show. You would have to dress it veeery carefully, in order to achieve a "side-by-side" position - and I am not sure that, even then, those two segments would remain so, after the final (heavy) loading. The "side-by-side" form, for this particular pair of "Eskimo" bowline we are talking about, is not very stable, even when we have quite "wide" loops.