UKC

Up until recently I have always tied in using a fig 8 into my harness as im sure the majority do. However the last few times I have been out I have tied in using a bowline, when leading and seconding. both knots are always tied off with a stopper. Anyone know the pros and cons to leading on the 2 knots? is one better suited for certain conditions/routes/disciplines eg sport, winter etc.
cheers.
Gra

In reply to gb83:

Practical advantages of a figure 8 include the facts that it is easy to spot if it is mistied and it is easy to loosen after tension.

Bowlines, on the other hand, are utterly gay.

In reply to Duz Walker:

Sorry!

In reply to Duz Walker:

I find when i tie a bowline wrong it all falls apart in my hands! and it is much easier to lossen! But i don't think it is as strong as a fig 8, and as it is easier to untie, it may be more likely to untie itself, although i've never had a problem when i use a bowline, but i do mainly stick with the fig 8.

In reply to gb83:

A figure of eight is a big fat ugly knot, hard to undo when it has been loaded and much loved by beginners, instructors, wall managers and those who worry about the rope breaking.
On the other hand the bowline is not.

Chris

In reply to gb83:

Have you looked at this thread for alternatives?

http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=222187

In reply to gb83:
Sports climbers like bowlines because they are quicker to tie/untie. Also they allow you to hang closer to the last clip if dogging because the knot is closer to the harness.
If tradding not much point....easier to tie wrong.

fig of 8 great for those who are pants at learning knots, or if you want the knot to stay tied all day long..

bowline, quicker to tie, to untie but harder to learn, i always use a bowline inside but fig of 8 outside for these reasons, i do however put an extra turn on my bowlines as they can come undone when not in constant load (ie when leading)

In reply to Chris Craggs:

So, that why I use a bowline. Also, a bowline can be tied one-handed.

In reply to gb83:


A bowline is a flimsy, asthenic, vain knot, hard to get home when loaded and much loved by rabbis, gentiles, bank managers and those who worry about nostril hair.

On the other hand...

In reply to Paddy Duncan:

Reverse overhand/ringbend/waterknot is much "closer"

see thread above

http://i1.tinypic.com/2z3z8ts.jpg

In reply to gb83:
a Bowline is a Knot of simple elegance and refinement - like sipping champers.
A Figure Eight is clumping great down in one pint of cider - with built in repeats.

In reply to gb83:

its a personal thing use what ever you like so long as its works and its safe !

Personally I like a fig of 8 - looks nice and eightish ...and has amphicheiral symmetry, the knot is equal to its mirror image.

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/KnotSymmetry.html


Ah ! lovely knots

In reply to gb83:

the bowline is simple to tie...bombproof...and is one of only a few knots that is easy to untie regardless of load put upon it...these are some of the reasons it is used so extensively in sailing. there is no point in responding negatively to this post because it is definitive.

In reply to gb83:

The bowline is versatile and can be tied in lots of different ways which comes in handy sometimes. It's also quicker to tie, easier to get in exactly the right place and easier to adjust.
All of that is of little importance to novices though, which is why I usually teach them the fig 8. But I often use the bowline myself.

:-P

In reply to Norrie Muir:

Also, a bowline can be tied one-handed.

So can a figure of 8, Norrie. Haven't you learnt that one?

In reply to Tim Chappell:

So, what one do you use?

In reply to Norrie Muir:

Figure of 8. Tried, trusted, and I can tie one handed with gloves on and my eyes shut.

In reply to Tim Chappell:

Nowhere near as easily. Neither can it be easily tied in thick Dachsteins that are covered in snow.

In reply to Alison Stockwell:

Just for info, does anyone use a bowline for anything except tying in?

In reply to Tim Chappell:

Handy for tying off around large objects.

Personally I use a bowline for sport and short single pitch but still use a fig 8 for long trad/alpine type routes.

J

In reply to gb83:

How many serious accidents have occured to experienced climbers due to incorrectly tied bowlines?

How many do you here about involving incorrectly tied figure of 8s?

You do the math.

In reply to Paz:

Are there actually any figures to back this up or is it just one of those 'urban myths' perpetuated by those who prefer fig 8.

J

In reply to Paz:

From that, can I assume inexperienced climbers use the figure of 8's or they can't tie knots?

In reply to Paz:
How many serious accidents have occured to experienced climbers due to incorrectly tied bowlines?
How many do you here about involving incorrectly tied figure of 8s?

surely that comes down to the simple fact of not being distracted when tying in, whatever method you choose.

In reply to Ropeboy:

Could be a myth yes, but I've not heard of anyone who's been using a fig 8 for twenty odd years have an accident or near miss because of it, while there are one or two high profile examples involving bowlines.

In reply to Paz:

I have seen somebody (fairly experienced) hit the deck after falling on an incorrectly tied Fig of 8, and one other person have the rope fall off whilst leading using the same knot (Chris Allott will remember that incident, although I hasten to add that it was not he). Accidents of this sort tend to happen because of being complacent/getting distracted when tying in, and are not "knot dependent".

Personally, I'm a bowline man. Advantages have already been outlined by others.

Dave

In reply to Dave Pritchard:


If I was teaching a novice to climb, why would I bother even showing him/ her the bowline?

A fig-8 is stronger (80 % of rope strength as opposed to 60% for a bowline), easier to teach, easier to buddy-check, and easier to tie. The only thing it isn't is easier to untie, but that's usually only an issue indoors and/ or when you fall and rest a lot.

In reply to Tim Chappell:


... Plus, there's nothing that I can think of that you can only do with a bowline.

In reply to Paz:

If you'd ever taught novices how to tie in you'd soon discover how easy it is to tie a rethreaded fig 8 wrongly.
Examples include tying it incompletely, and rethreading it back on itself so it pulls back out again under load.

In reply to Paddy Duncan:

Probably I'm being a bit thick here - but this argument (often postulated) seems the wrong way round. If the bowline is easier to tie wrong, then I would have thought it more important to use a fig of 8 in those situations where getting it wrong has most consequences - such as falling or lowering off. When sports climbing I fall off quite often, and get lowered off almost always. On the other hand, when trad climbing, I almost never fall or get lowered off. Or have to hold the weight of my second on the rope for that matter.

If you were going to choose on over the other, then I would have thought fig of 8 for sports and bowline for trad would have been the correct way around.

I usually use a bowline, btw. Not sure why it's thought to harder to tie correctly. If anything, I'm more inclined to get the fig of 8 wrong - if the tieing of the bowline goes wrong I always spot it immediately.

In reply to Alison Stockwell:

I have taught novices-- informally-- and yes, they do this, but it's very easy to pick up, and they find it very easy to correct.

In reply to gb83:


My Swiss pal uses a sort of fisherman's knot to tie in - says it is normal there.
Local Italians (Trento) tend to use bowlines, tied and then rethreaded so that the rope goes through the harness twice. Quite impressive.

I remember changing from bowline (late 1970s) to rethreaded 8 (1980s)

In reply to Tim Chappell:

Okay, lets say that fig 8 is better for begginers/novices but that there's nothing wrong with a bowline either.

J

So, it is easier to teach new climbers to tie a figure of 8, as it is harder to teach and tie a bowline.

Well, I learned to tie a bowline when I was a 12 year old Boy Scout, and I recall nobody had any difficulties in learning and tying a bowline.

Conclusions:

1. Climbing Instructors are not very good at teaching tying knots.
2. New climbers that go for instruction are a bit dense.

In reply to gb83: I use a bowline for sailing - on one occasion I had a bowline unravel itself. It was under repeated shock load, and the rope diameter seemed to shrink and the knot untied itself. For this reason, I would never consider using a bowline - there are disadvantages to using a figure of 8, but they are outqweighed (in my opinion) by the safety of having an unravellable knot!

In reply to Joe Miller:

Yikes, horror show. You've just put me right off bowlines.

In reply to Tim Chappell:
just tie an overhand stopper....
In passing....when using double ropes Bowlines are less intrusive being a much smaller knot ( even with stoppers)

In reply to Norrie Muir:
Ditto. Although I think I was probably an 8 year old cub when i was taught knots.


Both undeniably true

However....
As a scout leader in the 80's I was taking part in a mountaineering instruction weekend around Coniston old man and one of the professional instructors demonstrated how easily a Bowline can come apart if..
1. the tail is too short. and...
2. it's not tied off with a stopper.
luckily her guineapig was on flat ground and only fell on his arse. Made me make sure I always tie it off properly though.

In reply to Tim Chappell:

I have never ever known a bowline to come undone (you always use a stopper knot, as you do with any waist knot). To use the drinks analogy, for me a bowline is a fine wine, the figure of 8 drinking chocolate.

In reply to shortarse: I'm amazed that some people find the bowline a difficult knot to tie ('rabbit comes out of the hole, round the tree, back down the hole'!). I always use it (with two stoppers). 28 years' climbing, including a few (ahem) 'falls', and it's never let me down...

In reply to gb83:

The rabbit round the tree and back down his hole mnemonic?

My lips stil move when I am tieing a bowline.

Surely someone in a lab somewhere could give us some science on ravellibility with shock loads?

In reply to Marc C:

Doh! Beat me too it. Great minds or idiots?

In reply to graeme jackson:

As to the however, if anything is not done right in the first place it is not good anyway.

In reply to gb83:
What are the opinions on putting an extra of loop in the 'hole' of the bowline i.e. rabbit goes up through a 'double hole'? It's the way I was taught and I've fallen on it a lot, but can anyone tell me what are the actual advantages over a single loop, if any?

In reply to Alun:

Makes the knot slightly stronger in that the bowline used to be called a cutter knot, and it makes that 'cutting' edge slightly blunter.

In reply to Norrie Muir:

true enough.

In reply to Paz:

http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=178517&v=1#2571884

An incorrectly (partially) tied figure of 8 is just strong enought to pull a rope up a route behind the climber. It can look OK to a swift glance, particularly if your mind is elsewhere. An incorrectly tied bowline is more likely to fall apart and so is more easily recognisable.

Lynn Hill still thinks so too:
"In any case, perhaps it is harder to forget the second half of the knot if tying a figure eight because you can see that it is only half-tied."
[I think she means because you can't (at a glance) see that it's half-tied]
http://lynnhillblogs.com/2005/08/ (Friday 26th August)

In reply to gb83:

a friend of mine always uses the bowline to tie in.

having said that i was at MCC a while back and saw a guy desperately clinging on to a rope shouting my bowlines come undone... for some rather odd reason this guy was the belayer(obviously had taken a loop of rope and was belaying on this tied off with a bowline)..

Luckily managed to get another belay device on him.

He prob didnt do a stopper on the end...?

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Thanks Gordon.

Regarding the yosemite bowline, can anyone confirm that it definately doesn't need a stopper knot? Thinking of adopting this as my knot of choice.

Ali

In reply to alifin:

If you don't put a stopper knot in it (even if it 'doesn't' need one) you will be forever checking it!

Chris

In reply to gb83:
all this talk of "failure" and "accident" isn't helpful..when I go climbing I want 99.5% or better belief that my boots will stick, my gear won't break, rope won't snap and the bloody knot won't come undone....LEAVE IT!!

In reply to Chris.Allott:

>I want 99.5% or better belief that my boots will stick, my gear won't break, rope won't snap and the bloody knot won't come undone....LEAVE IT!!

You forgot, my arms are strong enough on steep stuff.

In reply to sutty:
I have sufficient doubts about the frailties of the human body... ( or in this case - this particular one!)

In reply to Chris.Allott:

Come on Chris, you should be well honed now that you're a "full time climber"

Dave

So then, what about clove hitches? they can slip, if positioned poorly. But no-one seems to question them.
Try it. on a crab.
If you tie a clove hitch with the piece of rope that crosses over pointing towards the load and the tails towards the load then it is Ok.
If you have the cross over of the knot pointing the away from the load and both tails towards the load, the rope can feed though when weighted.
Does depend on the rope and what it is attached to. Just a thought. Don't leave loose ends on clove hitches.

I,ve been using a bowline for 24 years, probably for about 15 years with a double loop and double stopper knot. It's easy to tie, obvious if its tied incorrectly and easy to undo after a fall. As a sport climber i test my knot on a regular basis. I am unsure as to why people would want to tie in with a figure 8 for sport climbing?

In reply to Dave Pritchard:
shouldn't you be working???
Unfortunately the "winter season" has seen me avoiding the plastic at every opportunity! Reasoning being.."I'll get going on the real stuff when it dries up"..so far 2 days of "dried up" - 1 of which too damn cold....so "Honing" has been less than 2 hrs so far in 2007....However..I have a cunning plan!

Anyone an Edwards bowline convert? http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=4

Obviously easy to get wrong, and takes a while (as long as a fig 8) to tie, but on the other hand has the advantage of being easier than a fig 8 to undo. If experienced and confident of getting it right every time, I think it's a pretty cool knot.

In reply to Chris.Allott:

I knew there was a good reason why I use a figure of 8.
Hope that's a genuine Somerset or Herefordshire figure of 8 not bloody Magners.

In reply to Tim Chappell:

Hmm the figures I remember being quoted (admittedly many years ago) were 75% for the fo8 and 70% for the Bowline. Wikipedia gives 80% for the fo8 and 60-75% for the Bowline and 70-75% for the double looped Bowline. The strength for both knots assumes that they are tied correctly which may not be the case with the fo8 which will still operate though at a reduced strength whereas an incorrectly tied Bowline will fail with just a simple tug.

Ultimately it is what you are happy with and, perhaps more pertinently, can tie consistently correctly.

boB

In reply to Bob:

Your figures for the bowline were what I remember but in hawser laid ropes in the early 60s. The fig8 was not much stronger, really only used by climbing instructors clipping kids onto a troll waist belt via karabiner then somehow became part of the institutionalised curriculum, fail your MLTB,SPA,MIC,DUCKSHOOING test if you did not use it.

In reply to gb83:

Figure 8; no question.

In reply to gb83: bowlines work very well, and as sed can be tied one handed if in the shit.

In reply to Gareth James: I use it, although it's probably no better than a bowline with a stopper knot.

In reply to craig d: "I am unsure as to why people would want to tie in with a figure 8 for sport climbing"-
Well I go sport climbing quite a bit, and I fall off quite a bit. For me the inconvenience of untying a tight figure-8 is more than outweighed by the peace of mind of the latter knot. And I am not talking about the inadequacies of the bowline from a mere hearsay/urban myth viewpoint. I used to tie-in with bowline and double stopper, until the circumstances on a climb(multiple stepped roofs) managed to undo the knot. Never again!

In reply to Rob Kennard: Waht about a rethreaded bowline, there is no better know for sport climbing.....

In reply to Rob Kennard:
Please explain how a bowline with a double stopper can come undone???

In reply to gb83:

belating off a bowline can be very dodgy if there is a wide load put on the rope tie in

In reply to neal.m: that should of course be belaying

Bowline, everytime, easy to tie, easy to undo, all you need is a bit of experience and confidence that you can tie it correctly. Can be tied with one hand or behind your back. Loves it.

In reply to gb83: Yosemite bowline everytime

A bowline (if started by feeding downwards) offers a convenient curve to grab, which is handy when clipping in extremis.

In reply to gb83:

Either knot works, just use the one you are more comfortable with and are happy is tied correctly.

I am a qualified tree surgeon and we use either a bow line or a barrel knot (half double fishermans tied onto a large crab and cinched down). These both are easy to untie especially after being loaded. For those who are worried about a bow line coming untied itself (who ever heard of that?) make sure you leave a tail of at least 6 inches. In tree surgery we would tend to tie a figure of 8 as a stopper but a standard stopper works just as fine..

Basically go with what you know and are happy with!

In reply to Gareth James:

I use that pretty well all the time now. Used to use a double loop bowline. Once you know the mechanics of tying the Edwards bowline it's no easier to get wrong than a figure 8.

In reply to IanJackson:


Its a trick I've never mastered (even on the ground and not in the shit). Looks so easy when others do it.

In reply to GrahamD: So does anyone else use a retrheaded Bowline? Its a great know as before rethreading it passes through your harness again, thus creating two loop-s through your harness and spreading the force/load over the surface area of two loops when loaded (need to ensure they load equally/are the same size). Prolongs the length of your harness....hence great for sport climbing when taking repeated falls/working....

In reply to duncan:

I don't think that a guy who's logged 7 boulder problems and uses an auto toproping machine in his lunch break and f*cked it up once is the most shining example of the experienced climber I was talking about that you could come up with.

Lynn Hill's obviously the famous example I'm thinking about, but my reading of that blog quote is completely the opposite to yours - I know she says she uses a double bowline but in your reading of it you seem to have replaced the word `can' with the words 'can not'. That's quite some misquote there, well done!

There were other regular examples in the mags' letters pages of bowline users messing it up after twenty years which is what I'm talking about, but Dave Pritchard's right, it's incorrectly tying any knot tht's the issue, it's just that a fig 8 obviously looks wrong, as the nice symmetry there when it's right is missing. This advantage of the simple at a glance check, which is invaluable when your brain is a
bit fuzzy because you're tired etc. far outweighs the fact that fat weak people can't undo a fig 8 after they've fallen off.

In reply to Paz:
>> Lynn Hill's obviously the famous example I'm thinking about, but my reading of that blog quote is completely the opposite to yours - I know she says she uses a double bowline but in your reading of it you seem to have replaced the word `can' with the words 'can not'. That's quite some misquote there, well done!

But the Lynn Hill excample is irrelevant to that. IIRC she was distracted and didn't complete her knot...hence it wasn't that she'd tied the knot incorrectly and not noticed...it was that she hadn't finished tying it at all, in which case the type of knot is irrelevant.

In reply to gb83:

Double bowline generally, with a half fishermans stopper. Lets face it, if the bowline fails (unlikely) the fisherman's will keep you off the deck.

When I'm showing off, I tend to use the Kiwi Death Knot. It looks tidy, and I'm assured it safe, but I've never tested it with a leader fall.

In reply to subject:

Compass West years back made everyone tie on in bow-lines for insurance reasons. Apparently 7% weaker (not much then) and a hell of a lot easier to untie that the SPA-beardy-helmet-obsessed figure of eight and its purveyors.

Have used the Edwards' method of tying bowlines since then and it's quick and foolproof (since you'll know full well if you've cocked up as it comes apart when you try to tie it).

All the stuff about bowlines being harder to learn is tripe. Hopefully, none of those who can't tie a bowline drive a car.

In reply to Cusco:

The way I've heard it was that Rowland was one of the first to "popularise" the use of figure 8 on courses in Wales. Mainly for quick change-outs of students tied in with krabs. It grew rapidly from there, the figure 8 came to be "the" knot for instruction courses, and Rowland's regretted his part in that ever since.

Not sure how true that is, but Mark Edwards told me the story in the Logan Rock a couple of years ago.

In reply to Marc C:

that bits easy, but which way up should the hole be? and which way round the tree should the rabbit go?

Having just been messing about with my rope to see if it makes a big difference, the way up of the hole is the difference between it holding or falling apart, and the direction round the tree is the difference between it slipping or not (before the stopper knots).


Another thing to throw in, I tend to belay from the rope loop rather than the belay loop. (easier to escape the system if necessary). Is there a problem doing this with a bowline in that if you pull on the loop (ie reverse load it) it the 'rabbit' can pull through?

In reply to nikinko:

You tie the bowline so the tail goes on the INSIDE of the loop, so if you forget to tie a stopper the end does not get snagged and pull the knot apart.

In reply to sutty:

It's really rather fantastic to imagine anyone doing it any other way. Aren't they taught about the rabbit coming out of the hole anymore?

In reply to Gordon Stainforth: Think Health & Safety legislation prevents using this analogy these days. Stems from an incident in the 70s when our scout instructor demonstrated the bowline using live rabbits, some 'holes' made from our jumpers, and trees made from broomsticks - all got rather out of control and several scouts had to be hospitalised with myxomatosis.

In reply to GrahamD: There you go friend, thats how i mastered it. already used it in anger...not good i guess.

In reply to IanJackson: yea link.... http://www.animatedknots.com/bowlineonehand/index.php?LogoImage=LogoGrog.jp...

In reply to alifin:

The BMC Knots booklet describes it as a bowline variant and states that ir doesn't need a stopper. Having said that, it's my normal tie-in and I always use a stopper. I like the ease of tying and untying, the double neck makes it more secure and the stopper is outside the loop.

In reply to Mike Swann: Great to see someone else uses the bowline variant as described in the BMC rope leaflet. It's a great knot, quick and easy to tie and above all very easy to undo when you have fallen on it. The BMC do say that it doesn't need a stopper but I always put one in - many wall managers don't know or understand the knot.

I am lead to believe that the bowline is actually a knot used and developed for sailing because it is easy to flip backwards and undo, it has subsequently been adopted by climbers. The bowline variant stops this.

I always use a figure of 8 for novices as it's easy to see if it’s tied wrong and will probably still work if it is. If the bowline is tied wrong it fails.

In reply to David Eckles:

>I always use a figure of 8 for novices as it's easy to see if it’s tied wrong and will probably still work if it is.

Nope, look at the positions of the rope in diagrams 2-6, a lot of the accidents with the knot are due to experienced climbers getting to stage 2-3 then getting distracted and setting off up the route. Saw it only a month ago and mentioned it to the climber.

My rather odd take on this:
I was climbing with someone who ties in with a bowline, and we both checked one another's knots as we should. However as I don't know what a correctly tied bowline should look like, there's wasn't a lot of point me checking his knot, really. (And yes I know the answer is to learn what a correctly tied bowline should look like!)

In reply to mike swann:

Thanks for that, I suppose for the extra time it takes to tie a stopper knot I may as well do it.

In reply to gb83:

The short answer is that the Figure 8 loopknot is pretty dependably tolerant
of various dressings & loading either end, and is relatively secure when slack.
The Bowline has a decided advantage on being easy to untie and to tie, but
should not be used w/o some further securing, either by a variant of the knot
or by some additional structure (such as the common Strangle knot tie-off).

But the Bowline should be k n o w n , both how-to and its characteristics
(not every need for a loopknot will risk its failure, after all).

I'm following up this post with a long one which addresses many points raised
above, as these questions/assertions pop up continually, and esp. via the Net
can spread like wildfire (though unlike that some burn long).

*knudeNoggin*

In reply to gb83:

Two sections: Quick answers & Variants (knots)

Q U I C K A N S W E R S
----------------------------

| Another thing to throw in, I tend to belay from the rope loop rather than the belay loop.
| (easier to escape the system if necessary). Is there a problem doing this with a bowline
| in that if you pull on the loop (ie reverse load it) it the 'rabbit' can pull through?

YES!!! This loading is known as "ring loading", and a REGULAR Bowline can spill in a flash (end pulls out).
(The spilled knot is effectively--i.e., as defined by this loading--a opp-side Lapp bend. Potentially, the Fig.8
can also fail in this loading, like the now infamous Offset Fig.8 abseil bend.) --see next:

| Sutty: You tie the bowline so the tail goes on the INSIDE of the loop,
| so if you forget to tie a stopper the end does not get snagged and pull the knot apart.
----
| ... and the direction round the tree is the difference between it slipping or not (before the stopper knots).

MYTH. While, yes, snagging the end of this version of the Bowline can capsize it, by the same token
once that end is released, it's highly likely that the knot will re-tie itself (as it's the very method employed
in the cited link for tying the Edward's Bowline). I doubt that there have been the rumored failures of the
Bowline attributed to this perceived vulnerability (contrary some on-line assertions).
And it is just THIS version of the Bowline that is NOT vulnerable to the ring-loading just discussed,
as the effective knot in that case is a Lapp Bend, which given the then-effective lonnnng end (i.e.,
what had been the main line for the Bowline), should lock off soon enough; the Bowline's end (now
one of the two effected "end"s of the bend) will be instantly nipped.

.:. But we can step past this question by agreeing that EITHER simple Bowline should be eschewed
[gesunheit! :-] in preference to some **secured** version. (See Variants, below.)

| How many serious accidents have occured to experienced climbers due to incorrectly tied bowlines?

We can re-emphasize: use some form of SECURED Bowline.

| JoeMiller: I use a bowline for sailing - on one occasion I had a bowline unravel itself.
| It was under repeated shock load, and the rope diameter seemed to shrink and the knot untied itself.
| For this reason, I would never consider using a bowline.

I'd like to know more of the circumstances (material, use) of that untying--fascinating/edifying!
But the fact doesn't have to bring your conclusion, as one can secure the Bowline.
(Play this game: believe that the old climber knot was a Fig.8-based ganging knot where the end
was rethreaded only to make a u-turn, i.e., about half-way. And then people had bad experiences
and so began rethreading it entirely--i.e., they didn't throw away the Fig.8 base and drop the knot.
Well, look at the basic Bowline as just such a beginning, and don't quit on it.)

| Well, I learned to tie a bowline when I was a 12 year old Boy Scout, and I recall nobody had any difficulties in learning and tying a bowline.

But you weren't tying it in slick, firm, kernmantle ropes, and hanging your lives on it up long climbs.
.:. One needs to beware taking knots from one material domain to another.

| Duncan: An incorrectly (partially) tied figure of 8 is just strong enough ...

... to break a bowline. AMGA has tested such knots and found them to be no weaker. Here, though, we must
note that "incorrectly/partially tied" is ambiguous re exact form (as, for that matter, is "Fig.8" !). Heck, one can
have a secure-under-load Fig.8-based knot with must two tucks & no u-turn.

| A fig-8 is stronger (80 % of rope strength as opposed to 60% for a bowline),
| easier to teach, easier to buddy-check, and easier to tie.

Re strength, one can more practically say: they are equally strong--i.e., neither breaks (so you won't know
any difference). If you want to get technical, well, there are so many issues re how strengths are determined,
and then how the knots are tied (damn near never detailed), that you won't find a good answer. I agree in
general, but there are Bowline variants that will surely be in the same neck o' the woods (ones in which
more diameters of rope pass through the bunny hole turn of the main line).
For some test results contradicting your quotes, cf [url]www.caves.org/section/vertical/nh/50/knotrope.html[/url].

As for teaching, that should be redressed; the Fig.8 tolerates sloppiness, let's leave it at that. Compare some
images and you'll soon see a variety of this "easy to learn, easy to tie, easy to check ... [blah]" knot's variety! The Bowline is MUCH easier to tie and tie quickly.

| Gordon: It's really rather fantastic to imagine anyone doing it any other way.
| Aren't they taught about the rabbit coming out of the hole anymore?

Along with this what needs teaching is the quick-tie method (mostly one
hand moving, the other supporting), which should be done as in the Grog-site's way BUT oriented with the
hand coming FROM UNDER the mainline--the knot is much better seen/understood/recognized by the
presentation of the side where the mainline's initial crossing into the knot is UNDER (the collar)!! --all
of the variations on the Bowline are better seen from THIS side. Unfortunately, the promulgated quick-tie
method and even rabbit-hole-tree one often show the opposite side up. boo!
And "buddy-check"? --educate your buddies! (It's a self-fulfilling prophecy to not learn and then cite ignorance.)

| Lynn Hill ... was distracted and didn't complete her knot

In fact, she didn't BEGIN the/a knot!
Obviously, she had no protocol of someone checking her knot--a dropped
precaution because of her skill at knotting, presumably; but it's not only
the skill that's checked, but the act.

| the fig.8 is easy to see if it's mistied ...
| -------
| If anything, I'm more inclined to get the fig of 8 wrong - if the tieing of the bowline goes wrong I always spot it immediately.
&
| I find when i tie a bowline wrong it all falls apart in my hands!

Yeah. I'd like to see some images of what a mistied bowline (that yet has integrity to exist
as a knot) looks like. There are some, um, *anti-bowlines* where the rabbit's passage in/out
of the whole are different (goes in the opposite side and returns IN that same side); but these
are valid knots, though with their own idiosyncrasies, strengths & weaknesses (and some are
quite nice!). Fig.8s aren't so much easy to check if they're right, but enough tolerant of the various
ways they get tied (dressed) that it doesn't matter which way, so much. (E.g., the photo'd knot
of the BMC Knots booklet is differently dressed than that in the tying diagrams.)

-------- Variants next post ...

*knudeNoggin*

In reply to gb83:

And while y'all 'r' still gasping for air, ...


V A R I A N T S
------------------

| Anyone an Edwards bowline convert?

Geesh, this is a quite convoluted mess of tying for a dubious result.
Much simpler are versions of the Janus Bowline, either with the collar oriented as for Edward's
(cited by Sutty et al. as wrong, and sometimes called "Cowboy Bowline") or as for the regular bowline.

| G.in G.: I have seen one where you tie a bowline through a clove hitch to avoid having to put a
| stopper on the bowline, no idea what its called.

It's the Water Bowline, compressed; "Clove Bowline" might be helpful to distinguish it from the original.
(The initial idea for the Water Bowline--i.e., the "original" knot--, allegedly, was to have that extra,
2nd turn (which makes the basis a Clove H.) indefinitely spaced from the Bowline, to put some load on
the end, which affects the way the Bowline then tightens. Moving this extra turn up snug to the knot then
creates a Clove Hitch, which indeed gives some better security to the knot. For kicks, make a sort of
Mirrored Bowline by taking the end around the 2nd turn's side of the eye and back out through the two
loops of the Clove (so, a 3rd pass!). It can all be somewhat loose, but no way is it all going to shake
out, or ever be hard to untie. --this is more **mirrored**-like if one uses the Girth vice Clove.

| gb83: What are the opinions on putting an extra of loop in the 'hole' of the bowline ...
| can anyone tell me what are the actual advantages over a single loop, if any?

One disadvantage is that it doesn't result from the quick-tie method,
but for security, it's better for the extra turn: slack of the mainline coming through the collar will not so
readily loosen TWO turns as just one. AND it works VERY well in most cordage with the "end bound"
finish shown in the variant shown by me in the link below.

| rethreaded bowline

This is an example of missing the point, to my mind: that one would so adhere to the pure "rethreading"
vs. see the benefits to bringing the end back into the knot **just as was done on the first pass**--making
a repeat rabbit run round the rhododendron!? In the the former (popular) case, the end is further secured,
but doesn't do much for the strength, and doesn't give great security either; in the latter case, you put in
two more diameters of material that the mainline crunches, which should reduce weakening effects on
the mainline, and there might be more security.

| NZ CragRat: I use a reverse water knot or ring bend (not sure that it has a correct name)
| Tie an O/H knot
| Thread through harness
| Instead of following through away from your body as with a Fig 8 thread back towards you.
| The tail should come out on the inside (harness side). It is simple, neat and you never have other bits
| of tail in the road when you grab rope to clip. Also easy to untie.

Excellent. Also (better?), this knot can be given and intial pass-through--to form a 2nd eye part through
the harness loops--before tracing the initial knot (which could be a Fig.8 vice Overhand); the Overhand
or Fig.8 initial knot will compress around the

| Have you looked at this thread for alternatives?
| www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=222187

I'll repeat my contribution & links posted there, for any unregistered readers denied access.
Here are some better bowlines than those commonly bandied about: [url]http://i3.tinypic.com/wjwh1t.jpg [/url]
and some other knots, designed to be secure-when-slack, yet easily untied:
[url]http://www.iland.net/~jbritton/Lehman8.jpg [/url]
[url]http://www.iland.net/~jbritton/LocktightII.jpg [/url]

The Janus Bowline--named for having the same face in either direction--, btw, was presented to the Alpine Club
in 1928 (w/end crossing on other side of itself). And, now, ... : better late than never? (And, yes, some of the
particular parts of the knots might be combined--such as using the Janus finish on a Dble. or Water Bowline.)

|nikinko: the way up of the hole is the difference between it holding or falling apart.

Let's consider the way up(down) the hole the difference between Bowlines & Anti-Bowlines, to expand terms.
There are plenty of nice anti-Bowlines to be found. Wrap the end around the crossing part of the "hole" such
that the end crosses itself (a like crossing point to ITS loop) towards the eye--this is a seviceable loopknot,
though not secure enough for rockclimbing. (Incidentally, if the mainline here is pulled straight--after loosening
the knot sufficiently ...--, one has a Constrictor knot formed by the end.) Make a 2nd such turn, though, and
improve its security--esp. when slack. There are anti-Bowlines (and single Bowlines) that can be tied w/o ends, too.

| KarlH: I am a qualified tree surgeon and we use either a bow line or a barrel knot (half double fishermans
| tied onto a large crab and cinched down). These both are easy to untie especially after being loaded. For those
| who are worried about a bow line coming untied itself (who ever heard of that?) ...

Firstly, Karl, I think that most of the duration of use by arborists the
bowline's under some sort of tension, not idly jostled about as it is on
a rockclimber's harness--during which time it can and sadly has loosened
to the climber's detriment. Secondly, keep in mind that different ropes
behave differently; arborist rope tends to be supple and less resistant
to bending, less resilient than many kernmantle ropes (something you'll
be immediately aware of if you try some KM III static line for SRT!).
Finally, I can't buy the promise of easy untying of a Strangle noose
("barrel...half-a-..."), not if heavily loaded (dropped any large cut
parts of tree on one? --no); sure, on the twin ends of a closed friction
hitch, each bearing about half a climber's weight, they should yield.
Bowlines, OTOH, have been known to be easily untied after break testing
(opposite another bowline, which broke first, i.e.)!

--- and so on,

*knudeNoggin*

In reply to alifin: I always use a half double fishermans as a stopper on my yosemite bowline. Apparently you don't need one but I don't want to find out.

In reply to knudeNoggin:

Are you very surprised to find that noone's read everything you've written?

In reply to Tim Chappell:

A fig8 on the bight can be easily tied one-handed which is great if you have a karabiner. If you're 1/2 way up a scramble/solo unable to let go with one hand looking to get a rope around you then you'd need to tie a re-threaded fig 8 one-handed which would be quite impressive.

...a one-handed bowline is still easy to tie around yourself.

In reply to knudeNoggin:

Bloody hell!

I just tie a 'Sutty style' bowline (the right way round) and add a Yosemite finish to stop the knot spilling under ring loading. It gets the tail out of the loop for easy belaying (I have to belay from the rope loop when I'm in my BOD harness).

Simple.

In reply to The Crow:

Yawn.

Why is this thread still going?

As long as you tie the knot properly it dosnt matter.

End.

In reply to Paz: You mean that the same questions will recur (as is done here)?
Dismayed, yes; surprised that some don't, yeah, for others, ... .
Happy with that?

*kN*

In reply to gb83: Bowline plus stopper, every time.

In reply to gb83: I've started using the bowline recently for training, but I read that in tests it reduced rope strength by something like 25-30%, so I don't think I'd lead with it outdoors.
Also a bit prone to coming loose if not under load, so I use a double-bowline and back it up with a stopper knot.

In reply to The Crow:


Don't like the sound of this "ring loading" much.

In reply to GrahamD:

indeed! Maybe I should apologise to everyone I've belayed for and 'loaded their ring'?

In reply to nikinko:

Ring loading is only dangerous if you simultaneously tug their end and spill their knot...

In reply to The Crow:

With or without a ring stopper knot ?