Author Topic: A simpler method of tying the Carrick Bend  (Read 3714 times)


  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2021
Re: A simpler method of tying the Carrick Bend
« Reply #15 on: May 11, 2020, 06:49:19 PM »
Helpful, yes in a way.
I surmise that Nobody did not want a lengthy answer with links at the first. Just to get an answer if anyone had seen the method of tying before.
So, I further surmise that the poster got offended quickly and decided not to play further, taking his offering with them.
Happens in the playgrounds all the time. ;-)


  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1470
Re: A simpler method of tying the Carrick Bend
« Reply #16 on: May 12, 2020, 02:33:57 AM »
It is a little odd that 'Nobody' took offense and disappeared - despite the fact that his question and later posits were answered in detail.
Oh well.
But, the ongoing pokes in the ribs from Dan isn't 100% helpful in my view - and people get caught in the crossfire.


And this is where the discussion should probably move to a different topic thread on loops and chirality.

Link is here:
Dan, you could post your propositions and arguments in that topic thread - and I will be happy to reply ... but without the unnecessary rib poking :)



        Excellent catch!!!

    This 'catch' was made on the basis of chirality!
    But, by your understanding, such a "catch" must be an irrelevant misconception that isn't real?

Yes, and a good one.  But that doesn't imply
a particular regard/definition of practical-knots'
handedness (but an enthusiast's eye via such
Very briefly to give the right of reply:
The inescapable fact is that chirality is a reality. And it is interesting how some people default to one tying method or the other.
The Carrick bend does appear in what appears to be a totally random mix of left-handed Vs right-handed orientations.
I'm not in any way stating that this is 'bad' or 'wrong' - rather, I personally find it very interesting.
I am of the view that many hobbyist knot tyers probably don't realize they're defaulting to left or right handedness - its just what they have learnt and they have formed long-term memory for following that pattern.
I see the same thing with the simple #1010 Bowline - which appears predominantly in right-handed 'Z' form.
And yet, the left-handed (S) form is just as valid.

I would also comment that loop chirality plays a crucial role in the symmetric end-to-end joining knots - and understanding this opens many interesting doors.

I'll leave it at that because further discussion would best occur in a different topic thread.


In conclusion, I think answers have been provided to 'Nobody', and much more.
He may not like how the answers were delivered - but in fairness, there was only good intentions to genuinely assist - and not to offend.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2020, 02:36:12 AM by agent_smith »