Knot for fixing a long rope (from the middle) to a long pole (in the middle)???

[Z]

I'm not sure if anybody mentioned these, but try these:

Gnat Hitch on a bight
Buntline Hitch on a bight

In other words, you take a bight of rope and tie those hitches on the bight as if the bight is a single strand of rope.  I just tied these knots in various rope.  They both held in multiple angles of pull.  I will note that the Gnat on a bight did capsize when I did not dress it tightly. After I dressed it tightly, it did not capsize.

Alternatively, as I mentioned earlier, there are some appealing options if you can use a carabiner. There are also appealing options if you're willing to use another strand of rope to secure the main rope to the pole.

[xarax]

   Gnat Hitch on a bight.

   Oh, my KnotGod !
   This "thing" manages to be worse even from the Gnat hitch itself - a remarkable achievement, indeed ! 
   

[Tex]

DL I get that your knot helps with pulls from changing directions, but this requirement was not dictated by the orignial question any more than "how do I tie a knot to a pole" would dictate it, in which case you would not have demanded directional stability though, or insisted that I had overlooked it.

It does turn out that your solution takes advantage of the two rope ends to do it.  I'm pretty sure there are also single rope end knots that have good directional pull stability too though.
I'm nto saying saying your solution is bad, just that your criticism was arbitrary.

[Tex]

xarax my problem with the gnat hitch is the same as with the buntline, which is that I don't greatly trust either one to not slip down as slipped-knot noose, ok in this case and many though.  I usually tie buntlines when it's ok.  What though in particular do you find bad about the gnat? I never used it much, so I don't know.

[Dan_Lehman]

xarax my problem with the gnat hitch is the same as with the buntline,
which is that I don't greatly trust either one
to not slip down as slipped-knot noose,
ok in this case and many though..

Slipping down qua noose is what one should expect
them TO DO --as they are noose-hitches (hitches
tied to the structure's S.Part).

X. doesn't like the gnat because Roo introduced it here
(though many keystrokes might fly in all directions other
than this).

--dl*
====

[xarax]

 

   What though in particular do you find bad about the gnat?

    I was kidding. I do not find it "bad", just mediocre ( = not bad ).
    What I hate is when somebody takes one of the maaany possible mediocre "Standind Part hitches", advertises it roothlessly, and sells it to poor knot users, who flock at the knotting super-markets of the web.
 
    Read the myth ( the "baloney", to use one of the many dL s polite words, and the lies ) about the so-called "Gnat hitch"   :
 
 " Origin: The Gnat Hitch was introduced in February 2012 (Notable Knot Index) and discussed with considerable interest in Canopy Chatter, the IGKT Forum and the Tree Buzz Forum because it is simple, secure, and resists jamming fairly well. Apparently this knot has not been previously documented. It is included here because new, useful, simple knots are relatively rare.
   Advantages: The Gnat Hitch is compact and seems to be quick and easy to tie. Some writers in the forums mentioned above found it easier to tie than the Buntline Hitch ? which does a similar job."

   http://www.animatedknots.com/gnat/

   Ouaou ! 

   There are 99 ( = ninety nine ) other "Standing Part hitches", which are equally "quick and easy to tie"(sic) - what exactly makes this particular one the best of all, will remain one of the great mysteries of the knotting world, I am afraid.., Unless you start tying, trying and comparing them, and then report your findings here. Good luck !

   Knotting Matters 61. September 1968, p. 40
 ( the so called "Gnat hitch", which, "apparently has not been previously documented"(sic), is shown at p.46 )
   http://www.grumpyogre.com/dumpextras/othermags/IGKT/KM61.pdf

( I hope dL gains something out of all this...  )

[Tex]

at DL,  I'd say some of standing end hitches are somewhat fixed.   An adjustable grip hitch or tautline hitch for instance.  They will slip down if the angle of pull is moved to and fro.  The friction of the object then creates a wave that momentarily releases tension on the nipping structure which slips it.  However they don't generally slip just by pulling hard.  I'm not as trusting of the butnline and gnat for that.

At xarax, I'm not sure that I'd call that "documented".  That could as well have been written by a computer program designed to spit out every combination of standing end hitches possible using less than N crossings. I think there may even a few fake crossings listed (things that look like crossings put topologically won't be) If someone wrote such a program and it spit out lots of output, would you call that "documented".   Maybe simply by writing the program we have already documented that we "know" how to tie these knots and we need not even run the program to document them! At least we know that pda75 is the z somekindamorphism of the dpa7 though.  I guess that much was documented.

Still I agree, that most of these hitches are unremarkable.  They work, but what else is there to say?  That's why regarding the gnat and buntline in the 10 knot list thread, I just said "whatever".

The interesting question, to get back on topic, is do any of them work well enough to consider for life saving?  Why not?  Is there a slack security concern with the buntline?  Does it matter if the loop might open up some when slack?  I suppose that brings a danger of snagging on something it shouldn't?

[xarax]

   most of these hitches are unremarkable.  They work, but what else is there to say? 

   Nothing. The Gnat hitch is an unremarkable Standing Part hitch, that just "works", as most other such hitches do.
   However, it is remarkably more advertised and sold than the others, is nt it ?  Guess why.
   The simplest and tightest one-wrap / "Standing Part hitch" that I know, is the "Underhand noose" / Simplest hitch (1),(2). The nub of its double/twin line version, is very compact, and that is a good thing regarding security - because, with just one only wrap, we need/want our hitch to be a "Jam" knot ( ABoK#1228). For yet a bulkier solution, see (3).
 
1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3288.msg19765#msg19765
2. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=5209
3. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=2919.msg17394#msg17394

[Dan_Lehman]

at DL,

This I think is TwitterSpeak?
I'm not "at", but "DL" directly --why otherwise?
(not a fan of pop for pop's sake!)-:

  I'd say some of standing end hitches are somewhat fixed.
 An adjustable grip hitch or tautline hitch for instance.
They will slip down if the angle of pull is moved to and fro.
The friction of the object then creates a wave that momentarily
releases tension on the nipping structure which slips it.
However they don't generally slip just by pulling hard.
I'm not as trusting of the buntline and gnat for that.

I classify them by their structure, irrespective
of the (media-dependent) behaviors --which would
run into such variances ("fixed" until F>XYZ in <material>...) !
But my point simply is that one should not have ever
"trusted ..." as you write, for those noose hitches are
not to be taken as fixing eyes (though, also, per one's
own assessment, there can be cases of low force and
frictive material such that you put in just a clove
vs. rolling hitch to effect an adjustable, tied-in-tension
eye.

In the case of tying to an object of size significantly
greater than the material's diameter, it is really not
so easy to maintain a snug fit, as the S.Part will pull
away the knotted part off of the object a little.

They work, but what else is there to say.
//
That's why regarding the gnat and buntline in the 10 knot list thread,
I just said "whatever".

You make it sound as though the bases will always
be loaded when you come to knotting bat, and so
expect there to be SOME knot resulting in a grand slam!
(USA baseball analogy, sorry)
When I see "zeppelin" and "butterfly" in the lists,
I think "ah, more fantasy zeal for the popularized
lesser known!  Why ever the latter vice the symmetric
#1408 (oh, we can deal with "evil imposter" tying by
tying correctly --or is that too much to ask?) ?!



--dl*
====

[xarax]

  When I see...the "butterfly" in the lists, I think : " ah, more fantasy zeal for the popularized lesser known ! Why ever the latter vice the symmetric#1408 "

 at Tex : In case you would nt get this comment, dL waits somebody to reply : " Because the Butterfly is TIB, while the ABoK#1408 is not " - so he will seize the opportunity to return, triumphantly, and inform the poor ignorante about his TIB #1408-like loop ( a re-tucked slip knot, which is "not bad"... (1)).

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=3827
 

[Z]

xarax my problem with the gnat hitch is the same as with the buntline, which is that I don't greatly trust either one to not slip down as slipped-knot noose, ok in this case and many though.  I usually tie buntlines when it's ok.  What though in particular do you find bad about the gnat? I never used it much, so I don't know.

I use the Gnat or Buntile when I specifically want a hitch to slip down and cinch the object.  I find the Gnat to be handy when I want a simple, single-turn hitch that cinches down and does not require a slip.  The Buntline is relatively small, but it requires a slip if I want to untie easily.  (A slip doesn't guarantee easy untie, but it's a lot easier than wrestling with a non-slipped Buntline.)

Anyway, keep in mind that I'm talking about tying these knots on a bight.  The properties are similar, but not all the same.  Play around with them and see what I mean.  Make sure to dress each knot tightly before use.

[xarax]

   ....Says the guy who posted a huge slip knot that unties if you pull one end.
   
   
   To anybody who has not learned it yet, I have to remind that slipped knots are meant to slip  , when one pulls their slipped Tail End...
   However, when one pulls their Standing End, they usually do not.
   I have shown a slipped double-line Pipe hitch, which is TIB, and it can withstand a lengthwise pull. Of course, if one uses the proper kind of glue, he can do exactly the same thing with a double line Gnat hitch - or, even better, with a double line No hitch ( = with a double line, period. )

[xarax]

  I'm talking about tying these knots on a bight.  The properties are similar, but not all the same.

  More precisely, you are talking about tying those knots on/in-a-bight, with-a-bight : by using the two-legs bight as the end of an one-strand rope. There is a difference, even between the "on-the-bight" and the "in-the-bight" :  The bowline on-the-bight is not a bowline tied with-a-bight - it is not double-line-made everywhere. (1)
   
   Indeed, their properties are not "similar" : these double-line knots are worse than the originals ! 
   ( In general, double lines can not be nipped and immobilized as effectively as single lines : they tend to slide on each other. When we have two lines going through an encircling nipping loop, they should better be at an angle as close to 90 degrees as possible relatively to each other, so they "bite" deeply each other : their surfaces become saddle-shaped ).

1. http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=5300.0

[Dan_Lehman]

  More precisely, you are talking about tying those knots on/in-a-bight, with-a-bight : by using the two-legs bight as the end of an one-strand rope. There is a difference, even between the "on-the-bight" and the "in-the-bight" :  The bowline on-the-bight is not a bowline tied with-a-bight - it is not double-line-made everywhere. (1)

Which difference shows on the one hand
a difference in the connotation of "bight"
--differing definitions--,
and likely enough some difference in various
folks' application of the titles.

(I'm tempted to lean towards splitting off for
"bight" the sense of "doubled/folded/twinned"
rope, and looking for a replacement for the
"without ends" sense.  Although the non-cordage,
nautical/maritime (even inland waterways) uses
fall somewhere between : seems that a shore's
"bight" is less *folded* than a "cove", and that
of an inland waterway quite so?!  "Ends" don't
figure in these senses.)

"with a bight" tends to be least ambiguous.


--dl*
====

[xarax]

a difference in the connotation of "bight" --differing definitions---

Ashley is not clear either.