A variation of the Bull hitch.

[Dan_Lehman]

Wow, that X. character sure can kick up a lot of
chatter, new or old.
Whatever my oversights prior,
I see that there are at least these two differences
available in the subject hitches:

1) the clove hitch can be loaded qua
two half-hitches, which hasn't been tested
(with tucked tail, i.e.), or qua buntline ;
and
2) the crossing part of the clove hitch can be
 viewable OVER the ends when we look at it
with ends coming OVER the hitched spar,
or it can be on the other side --in the former case,
one has the SPart/Tail reaching to wrap around
the straight parts AND THEN go through this
crossing part after,
and in the other case they push through the crossing
part as they reach to wrap.

AND the 2 diff.s above can be combined for 4 versions
(simply : 2 variations and then on them 2 ends to load).

<whew>

--dl*
====

[xarax]

  Perhaps the ( indirect, and slooow, as always... ) route I had followed, can shed some more light on the origins of this issue :
  I had tried to figure out a very tight, self-locking "neck", tighter than the double, crossed or not nipping loop used in the Bull and Bull X hitches, so that both ends, the "Standing End" and the "Tail End" ( those names do not have much meaning here, of course...), can be immobilized by its nip around them - and so both wraps, the direct continuation of the "Standing End" and the direct continuation of the "Tail End", could retain and accumulate any tensile forces happened to be inserted into them during the pre-tightening or the tightening phase. In other words, I had tried to turn the humble Cow hitch into a "tight" hitch, able to withstand a lengthwise pull ( to a satisfactory, considered its small size/required rope-length, degree ) in a different, more symmetrical way than the way used in the "Locked Cow hitch".
   The reminiscence of the Clove hitch been jammed around a segment of a rope ( see (1), and read my attempted explanation / theory about its behaviour, in relation to the expected, more "normal" behaviour of the Girth hitch ), was all that was needed to help me complete this small step - but the result was a very easy to tie, TIB and secure "tight" hitch, which could / should had been tied centuries ago !  It turns out that the primordial Clove hitch, when it is tied around the "soft", compressible surface of one or more segments of a rope, is a much more interesting knot than when it is tied around the "hard", incompressible surface of a spar !  Anyway, I was looking for a very tight, almost jamming "neck", and the Clove hitch was the first and simplest such thing that, sooner or later, should had crossed any knot tyer s mind.
   Now, I guess that Estar followed a completely different route - and so the fact that he did not tied the same hitch should not come as a surprize. He started from the most reliable one-wrap hitch he knew, the Buntline hitch, and then he tried to re-tuck it in some way, to add bells and whistles, curves and turns into the Standing Part s path, in order to increase friction, and immobilize it, so he could get a more secure hitch ,reliable even if it is tied on a very slippery materials. He was interested in preventing the slippage of the Tail End of a Buntline hitch, not in preventing the slippage of the Standing End of a Cow hitch, as I was. Different purposes, different means, different ends, as it should had been anticipated.

1.  http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4347

[Knutern]

Thanks for sharing guys. I liked the looks of the Bull-Clove hitch 

Also, after some tries I managed to tie it at the bight too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZHeJWUimB4&feature=youtu.be

[xarax]

   If a TIB method is difficult to memorize, learn, remember and execute, it is almost useless... There are knots that can be tied in-the-bight much easier and quicker than in-the-end - but even if this can not be achieved, we should not go to the other end ! I mean, we would never choose to tie a particular knot because it is TIB, although to tie it in-the-bight is considerably more complicated than to tie it in-the-end - as it is the case with your method. I bet there are "simpler" TIB methods for this knot, but I do not know what a "simple" tying method is !    ( I doubt whether we can define, in an objective way, "simplicity", even for the shape / structure of each different knot - therefore something that involves so many subjective and accidental elements, depending on the experience, dexterity, memory, etc., of each different knot tyer, will probably remain impossible, for ever. ) 

[Luca]

Hello Knutern,

A very good TIB hitch by xarax,and a very good TIB method by you,in my personal experience(as noted by xarax,these things are individual matters)!
In your video you act slowly, which makes things very easy to understand,thank you.
Maybe it's just a bit laborious only to get what is shown at 00:28,but after all,it can be seen as an Overhand noose dressed in a particular shape;in ABoK,Ashley illustrates,about #1048,how to get quickly this figure:simply make an Overhand noose and then capsize the knot'nub as shown in the first pic(below);the result,in the second pic,is identical to what you show at 00:28,is just viewed from the opposite side.In this way everything should be done easier and in a more intuitive way, and I personally find that the rest of your method is also easy and intuitive (it's easy, IMO,after the haltering of the noose's loop, to identify which are the two bights that communicate directly with the standing ends, and the bight which must be back-flipped).
So, I think that(despite the opinion of xarax, the deviser of this hitch), at least after a bit of exercise, fundamentally the method that you show us has the opportunity to compete in speed and ease with the in-the-end method.

                                                                                                                                  Bye!

[xarax]

   We have seen this Cow/Girth "neck" - based Bull hitch, as a noose : it is the Double Ring or Double Running knot, shown by Ashley at ABoK#1126. He does not mention it as a hitch

   Not true : He mentions, in fact he names it as a hitch, at page 15, along with many other hitches. ( ABoK#60 )
   However, and this is the funny thing, it is the ONLY hitch in the page which is NOT shown as a hitch, tied on Ashley s tree ! (  See the attached picture ). So, the most "tight" hitch of all shown in this page, which can be tied in-the-bight and in a glance, is the ONLY one which is not shown tied around an object - and it is also considered being a "loose" hitch, in which " the ends, after passing around another object, are made fast to their own standing parts." ( at : ABoK#48 ). Evidently, Ashley believes that only the "snug" hitches are "tight" hitches, and that all the "nooses" are "loose". He has not discovered how a very tight "neck" can "lock" both standing parts, the Standing AND the Tail End ( as it happens in the case of the Bull Clove hitch and the ABoK#60=1126 ) - and how much the interaction of this "neck" with the hard surface of the object can enhance its gripping power ( as it happens in the case of the simple-hitch-a-la-Gleipnir ). He only cares about the locking and the security of the Tail End, which he believes should better be immobilized by being squeezed under one or more riding turns, as it happens with the "snug" hitches.
   I believe that was a great mistake - but a great knot tyer can do as many great mistakes he wishes, and yet remain a great knot tyer ! 

[Luca]

Hi xarax,

That is how I use to tie it, Luca. I also start from the slipped overhand knot - but this highly asymmetric start can be considered as inappropriate for a quite symmetric knot...

But in the end the Overhand knot (the knot's nub of the noose) in itself is symmetric, and the symmetric Clove hitch is the knot's nub of the(quite asymmetric) Bull-Clove hitch!(although maybe I think I have an idea of why you consider this hitch as quite symmetric: http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4929.msg32346#msg32346 )

I first tie the "Estar hitch" (  the one shown by SS369 at Reply#3 ), and then I flip it over, and form the Bull Clove hitch. .

I do not understand this: tied in the bight (and in the air), the knot is neither the one nor the other hitch(es) until to the moment when one decides how to apply it to the object that needs to be wrapped..or not?
Anyway:in Italian is said "discover the hot water",but only now I fully realize that the Bull-Clove hitch is REALLY a development of the simpler Bull hitch!Which in facts appears(has to be dressed) at 0:52 in the video by Knutern( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZHeJWUimB4&feature=youtu.be ). So,in fact, there is  also a "Bull hitch way" to build the Bull-Clove hitch.And the Bull hitch itself, is a development of the Girth hitch:in this way, starting from the Girth hitch(a symmetrical start!), is achieved quickly the Bull hitch (for those accustomed!Here a couple of methods: http://notableknotindex.webs.com/bullhitch.html ) ,and from the Bull hitch, just as quickly,is possible to obtain the Bull-Clove hitch(with the backflip visible starting from 1:18 in the video by Knutern.The first method shown on the Notable Knot Index page makes possible that also the Bull-Clove hitch can be used as ring hitch on the bight*:is sufficient that the backflip visible in the video also includes the ring ).
I include(below) some diagrams illustrating the backflip from a Bull hitch which has the same handedness than the one shown on the Notable Knot Index  page.

*EDIT:Both the methods illustrated on the Notable Knots Index page make possible that the Bull hitch and the Bull-Clove hitch can be used as ring hitches

                                                                                                                              Bye!

[xarax]

the Overhand knot... in itself is symmetric

   In what sense ? Even if you can claim that the ( ugly, in its common form ) overhand knot has some obscure symmetry in it, the slipped overhand knot, from which you start, has no symmetry whatsoever. We tie in-the-bight a rather symmetric, balanced, good looking knot, starting from a non-symmetric, and ugly initial configuration... Moreover, the Clove hitch appears only at the very end, like a deus ex machina ! I do not like it. If I had to tie quickly a two-wrap TIB "tight" hitch, able to withstand loading by both ends, and, for some reason, I could nt tie a Locked Cow hitch, I think I would had preferred the ABoK#60 / 1126 instead.

[xarax]

   I do not understand this: tied in the bight (and in the air), the knot is neither the one nor the other hitch(es) until to the moment when one decides how to apply it to the object that needs to be wrapped.. or not ?

   Not !  There is no hitch without the object - in other words, the object ( the spar, in this case ) plays a vital role in the knot - it is, in a sense, a "passive" part of the knot. (2)
   Those two hitches are not one-wrap hitches, where the relative position and the orientation of the wrap(s) do not matter. Try to tie the Andalusian hitch, or any other of the "hitching cousins" tied by squarebanksAlaska (1), by rotating /"flipping" their wraps in the same way ... 
   
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4739.msg30590#msg30590
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4995.0

[Luca]

the Overhand knot... in itself is symmetric

 In what sense ? Even if you can claim that the ( ugly, in its common form ) overhand knot has some obscure symmetry in it, the slipped overhand knot, from which you start, has no symmetry whatsoever.

De gustibus non est disputandum:to my eyes the Overhand is not so ugly...and it is (quite)symmetric(below some KM diagrams from my "archive").(and yes,the slipped Overhand knot is(very much)asymmetric)

Moreover, the Clove hitch appears only at the very end, like a deus ex machina ! I do not like it. If I had to tie quickly a two-wrap TIB "tight" hitch, able to withstand loading by both ends, and, for some reason, I could nt tie a Locked Cow hitch, I think I would had preferred the ABoK#60 / 1126 instead.

Perhaps it is even more true with respect to TIB methods described here, but in general it is always a bit like a puzzle to understand what happens when one performs the steps to realize a loop or a hitch in the bight rather than using the in the end method.
Anyway(In my personal experience) #60/1126 is not always easy(or at least quick) to dress and set it correctly...

   I do not understand this: tied in the bight (and in the air), the knot is neither the one nor the other hitch(es) until to the moment when one decides how to apply it to the object that needs to be wrapped.. or not ?

   Not !  There is no hitch without the object - in other words, the object ( the spar, in this case ) plays a vital role in the knot - it is, in a sense, a "passive" part of the knot.

But I find that this is actually a kind of confirmation of what I have written!
(and in this regard I have always been in agreement with you(an "old"(and extremely naive and incomplete) explanation:

OK, after some things a little obvious I wrote above, there is another thing a little obvious  that personally fascinates me with regard to snug hitches,which is that there is a sort of "mutual aid" between the hitch and the object that it wraps, because the object is grabbed by the hitch, but at the same time, the grabbed object itself,becomes an integrated and constitutive part of the hitch,which,removed from the object that grabs,often resolves itself to be nothing, just disappears!

)

   Those two hitches are not one-wrap hitches, where the relative position and the orientation of the wrap(s) do not matter. Try to tie the Andalusian hitch, or any other of the "hitching cousins" tied by squarebanksAlaska (1), by rotating /"flipping" their wraps in the same way ... 
 

Yes,but "Unfortunately" the hitch(es) in question work(s) with both the orientations of the wraps(I refrain from considering what works best in general or which best meets the expectations of those who have discovered these hitches (but "visually" I prefer the Bull-Clove,compared to the Estar ...)).

...there is  also a "Bull hitch way" to build the Bull-Clove hitch. And the Bull hitch itself, is a development of the Girth hitch : in this way, starting from the Girth hitch (a symmetrical start !),  the Bull hitch is achieved quickly ... and from the Bull hitch, just as quickly, it is possible to obtain the Bull-Clove hitch

  Right ! 
  I hope somebody, you or Knutern, will make a video to "animate" this sequence of moves.

Still remains the problem that the Clove hitch/deus ex machina appears at the last moment ...


   

[xarax]

...to my eyes the Overhand is not so ugly... and it is (quite) symmetric

  In its 8-shaped form, it is very nice knot, just like the fig.8 knot. In its "other" form, it is "other" than nice, i.e. it is but nice  - so, what is it ? UGLY ! 
  So, I would better say that, "in its common form"(sic), it is not manifestly symmetric. 

[xarax]

(the) #60/1126 is not always easy (or at least quick) to dress and set it correctly...

  If the weight with which you load it is heavy enough, compared to the diameter of the rope, it is self-dressing. If it is not, then yes, it requires some care. However, we use "tight" hitches only when we need to "store" some tension in the wraps, so, presumably, we use them when we pull the end(s) forcefully, against the pole. ( I often use hands AND feet to be sure I had taken out any millimetre of slack I could ). In such cases, the knot is self-dressing.

   I do not understand this: tied in the bight (and in the air), the knot is neither the one nor the other hitch(es) until to the moment when one decides how to apply it to the object that needs to be wrapped.. or not ?

   Not !  There is no hitch without the object - in other words, the object ( the spar, in this case ) plays a vital role in the knot - it is, in a sense, a "passive" part of the knot.

 I find that this is actually a kind of confirmation of what I have written!

  No, I mean that the knot is not actually tied, its tying is not finished, until=unless you insert the spar in it - or wrap the spar with it. So, as the knot is not finished, it can not be "the one or the other hitch" : it is not either = neither of them. Only when you have "tied" it, when you have made anything that will determine its geometrical form after it will be tightened, only then you can tell what knot it is ( and, sometimes, not even then, because, in physical, not-ideal knots, topology does not determine geometry uniquely ),
   Therefore, what you have "tied" in the hand is not a finished knot, which you could compare to another, it is only the first stage of it : and it happens the first stage of tying the Estar knot to be identical to the first stage of tying the Bull Clove hitch. But the final move, where the spar takes its place in the knot, separates the men from the boys ! 
   You could well had rotated the one or both wraps one less or one more 180 degree turn / one more time, the one clockwise and the other counter-clockwise, and form any of the four variations described by dan Lehman in Reply#15 ( and then some...), and only afterwards penetrate them with the spar. Would this mean that all those "knots" would be identical, "until" then ?
   That is what I meant in my comment : I was replying to your question : " Is the knot either the one or the other hitch until the moment when..."  There is no knot until this moment, at least there is no finished knot. The comment you cite now is 100% right, of course.

  Yes, but ....the hitch(es) in question work(s) with both the orientations of the wraps

  So what ? Are they the same knot, because they both work ? ? ? 
  What you have tied "in-the-hand" is only the first stage of a knot, which happens to be identical for both knots, it is not the finished knot. The finished knot requires the presence of the spar, and it requires a particular position of the spar within it. The fact that the spar can penetrate the unfinished "knot" in more than one ways ( it could had been the case that it could penetrate it in more than two ways ! ), and yet the TWO knots that are tied by those ways, both work, is not a proof of their identity ! It happens many times, the final tuck on a not-yet-finished knot, to generate two or more knots that work - but this does not mean that they were the same knot, until this final tuck ! The insertion of the spar within the two wraps is equivalent to one ( at least ) tuck, so we just can not compare unfinished knots = half tied knots, and tell if they are identical or not.
   
   

   Still remains the problem that the Clove hitch/deus ex machina appears at the last moment ...

   
   Our situation is improved - because now we can watch the formation of the Clove hitch out of / on top of the two "parallel" loops around the "neck" of the hitch. One should tie the Clove hitch somehow, and the way it is tied in this sequence of moves is simple, easy and conceptually much more clear than when we start from the slipped overhand knot, IMHO.   
   
   

[Knutern]

.... snip ....
  I hope somebody, you or Knutern, will make a video to "animate" this sequence of moves.

Hi.

Have a look at this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnBFo58O8u4&feature=youtu.be

I wish I had better light condition here and a better video recorder, but this is what I get from my webcam.

[Knutern]

Hi.

I guess this method is simpler. Haven't tied it by this method more than some times so I cannot tell if this is the way I'll remember best.

The first way tying was just me cheating - that is I untied the knot, and thereafter I tied it again backwards (after playing a video of the untying in reverse).
However - I assume this isn't always resulting in the most effective ways to tie a hitch the TIB way. Partly because when watching a reverse video of an untying sequense, the rope makes som moves and twists that is very difficult or near impossible to perform.

[Luca]

Hi xarax,

I first tie the "Estar hitch" (  the one shown by SS369 at Reply#3 ), and then I flip it over, and form the Bull Clove hitch. .

I do not understand this: tied in the bight (and in the air), the knot is neither the one nor the other hitch(es) until to the moment when one decides how to apply it to the object that needs to be wrapped..or not?

   I do not understand this: tied in the bight (and in the air), the knot is neither the one nor the other hitch(es) until to the moment when one decides how to apply it to the object that needs to be wrapped.. or not ?

   Not !  There is no hitch without the object - in other words, the object ( the spar, in this case ) plays a vital role in the knot - it is, in a sense, a "passive" part of the knot.

 I find that this is actually a kind of confirmation of what I have written!

  No, I mean that the knot is not actually tied, its tying is not finished, until=unless you insert the spar in it - or wrap the spar with it. So, as the knot is not finished, it can not be "the one or the other hitch" : it is not either = neither of them. Only when you have "tied" it, when you have made anything that will determine its geometrical form after it will be tightened, only then you can tell what knot it is ( and, sometimes, not even then, because, in physical, not-ideal knots, topology does not determine geometry uniquely ),
   Therefore, what you have "tied" in the hand is not a finished knot, which you could compare to another, it is only the first stage of it : and it happens the first stage of tying the Estar knot to be identical to the first stage of tying the Bull Clove hitch. But the final move, where the spar takes its place in the knot, separates the men from the boys ! 
   You could well had rotated the one or both wraps one less or one more 180 degree turn / one more time, the one clockwise and the other counter-clockwise, and form any of the four variations described by dan Lehman in Reply#15 ( and then some...), and only afterwards penetrate them with the spar. Would this mean that all those "knots" would be identical, "until" then ?
   That is what I meant in my comment : I was replying to your question : " Is the knot either the one or the other hitch until the moment when..."  There is no knot until this moment, at least there is no finished knot.

I'm sorry, I expressed myself badly: the "... or not?"in my reply was just a rhetorical question:I'm aware that  "tied in the bight (and in the air), the knot is neither the one nor the other hitch(es) until to the moment when one decides how to apply it to the object that needs to be wrapped("unless, for example, is not tied in the bight around a ring",I add now)".My real question was why you wrote "I first tie the "Estar hitch" (  the one shown by SS369 at Reply#3 ), and then I flip it over, and form the Bull Clove hitch".

  Yes, but ....the hitch(es) in question work(s) with both the orientations of the wraps

  So what ? Are they the same knot, because they both work ? ? ? 
 

NO! They are not the same knot!They work differently!I agree with you(but,however,in this case,they  both work..).

   

   Still remains the problem that the Clove hitch/deus ex machina appears at the last moment ...

   
   Our situation is improved - because now we can watch the formation of the Clove hitch out of / on top of the two "parallel" loops around the "neck" of the hitch. One should tie the Clove hitch somehow, and the way it is tied in this sequence of moves is simple, easy and conceptually much more clear than when we start from the slipped overhand knot, IMHO.   

For how it seems to me,the Clove hitch-component appears in the same way and at the same (last) time,either using the Knutern/slipped Overhand-#1048-first-step way,either by using the "Girth + Bull hitch" way.
The advantages of the "Girth + Bull hitch" way are that, with regard to the idea of ​​a way it can evolve the Girth hitch, it is conceptually more correct,and that, from a more practical point of view, makes it possible to use the Bull Clove hitch as a "ring hitch in the bight",perhaps using a closed circle of rope(which in effect can perhaps be seen as a confirmation of a greater "conceptual correctness" of the use this method,since it is a prerogative both of the Girth hitch and the Bull hitch).
However, when used to wrap an "open" object , I personally find that the Knutern/slipped Overhand etc. way is a bit more quick and intuitive(mostly I find it easier to identify what is the bight that has to be backflipped)and also (this may be caused solely by the way I handle the rope) I have personally found a lower tendency of the rope to twist on itself during the execution of the knot.

Anyway, since you mentioned it in your first post, I attach (below) a series of diagrams illustrating how to get also the "Constrictor Bull hitch"(is just for "the collection"!) by the "Bull hitch way" method.

                                                                                                                                 Bye!