Alan - I keep ending up with a 'single eye' variant of the 'Karash' Bowline...
I have attached some old images I found on my computer.
Only named them 'Karash' since he apparently claims that he 'discovered' a 'TIB' version
(what he calls the Karash double loop). The tying method depicted is based around
#1047 but is completely unnecessary as it can be tied similarly to #1080 ...
Indeed Mr. Karash long ago submitted to me his discovery
and subsequently got it tested and presented it on his own
WWWeb site. I likened it to doing to what
Hansel&Gretelcall --pp.36/7, #197 (on Plate #11, "Bowlines")-- "the Twist
Bowline" but in a
bowline in the bight variation. ["H&G" =
EKFR]
There is the question of which end to load, and so on.
And one can take this foundation and go with some
"wraps" as have I & Alpineer with our
locktight / tresse
barrel knots --though, in the base, wraps do not
appear (one could regard this "base" stage, then,
as "degenerate", similarly the
overhand vis-a-vis
its "multiple" forms which can have wraps but not
the simple knot base. (And why I favor using the
starting points to counting monikers "double, treble,..."
to be "grapevine" & "strangle", for they have *one*
wrap, and fit the implications of "double" for two
and so on, unlike "double fisherman's" which has
ONE not two.)
--dl*
====