UKC

Bowline with yosemite finish(+stopper knot) seems like an excellent knot, much easier then Edwards bowline. I can't understand why more people don't use it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yosemite_bowline

http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=4

Thoughts?

(No spiel about the safety of a figure eight knot please!)

In reply to Fman: I like a bowline where the loop is made from a clove hitch. Not sure what it is called, but fast to tie.

In reply to Fman:

I just like a bowline with stopper knot. Have to agree that the Edwards seems very complicated.

In reply to Removed User: I havent heard or seen that before, sounds good. have you a link?

In reply to eirenutter: Water bowline apparently

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_bowline

Here's a link (complete with rabbit!)
http://www.hightrek.co.uk/climbing/how2/bowline.htm
Its what I've always used, quick to tie, but perhaps I'm an 'old person'...

In reply to Fman:
Every German I´ve seen tie-in with a bowline (and it is very popular here) uses the double bowline (some call this a one and a half bowline). This is the `other´ knot taught by the DAV for tying in and considered the best for sport climbing. Apart from being absolutely safe and easy to tie it has the virtue of giving two strands through the belay loop which reduces wear on this when working routes. youtube.com/watch?v=KUHA_DuJXng&

In reply to jimtitt:

In that video the rope is tied through the belay loop of the harness, rather than 'ignoring' it i.e. threading the rope through both the belt and legloops along the same path as the belay loop: is that how you see the majority of folks using this knot? Or is it possible that it is filmed in that way in order to achieve some greater clarity?
It seems to add another link in the safety chain, and hence flies in the fact of both the detail and the principles I have always been taught (all in the UK, I hasten to add). Interesting knot, all the same.

In reply to jimtitt:

The knot in the video differs from what is usually called a double bowline, which just has a second loop where the "rabbit" comes up the hole.

I'd describe it as a form of rethreaded bowline, but it's notable for the fact that the rope is passed a second time through the harness.

I'm sure a knot-expert will be along soon to tell us its official name!

In reply to Alan_2468:

It's a bowline on the bight - Ashley 1075

In reply to brt:
Except it wasn´t tied on a bight so it can´t be, so we call it a one-and-a -half bowline which seems to describe it well.

softlad- probably just for the video, I only know one guy who ties into the belay loop as this is claimed to save wear. Crap for sport climbing though being yet further from the bolt! Pretty well the universal tie-in knot in southern Germany.

In reply to jimtitt:

It's a bowline on the bight. Ashley quite literally, wrote the book.

Any sailor will know it as such. Any caver will know it as such.

In reply to brt:

Yes - no doubt that it's an identical knot, but, as Jim says, not tied on the bight!

In reply to Alan_2468:

I suggest you get a copy of said book. It'll explain it nicely.

In reply to brt:
Read the note at the end of knot 1100.

In reply to Fman: I only use the Yosemite bowline unless on multipitch which is ironic really as it was designed by those that climb multipitch in yosemite!!

In reply to jimtitt:

You're probably referring to how the knots are tied i.e. tied on (or under, or in) the bight and those that are tied on the end. It's called the Law of loop, hitch or bight. It guides us on how to tie any knot (whether on a bight or on an end) and shouldn't be confused with the end product; hence climbers often refer to a "figure of eight on the bight" when there isn't any such knot. The knot can be tied on a bight but is a figure of eight loop or Flemish knot - ABOK 1047. It can of course be tied with an end (a rethreaded or follow through figure of eight) - but then people still call it a figure of eight on a bight!

Does it matter? Probably, if you want me to tie the knot you ask for.

And to the OP. Sorry for the wildly off topic: I use the Yosemite Bowline.

In reply to jimtitt: excellent way of tying into the midpoint of the rope is to use this knot, makes a nice small knot that doesn't get in the way.

In reply to jamface:

Yes, should have mentioned that too. Needs a little practise to avoid a dog's dinner but an excellent knot.

In reply to brt:

I have occasionally wondered if the bunny ears could more properly be called a figure eight on the bight. If you draw a parallel with the way a bowline on the bight is tied, and consider that you end up with two loops which are adjustable against each other, it seems to fit quite well.

The knot can be tied on a bight but is a figure of eight loop or Flemish knot - ABOK 1047. It can of course be tied with an end (a rethreaded or follow through figure of eight) - but then people still call it a figure of eight on a bight!

Well put. It really is a bowline on the bight, regardless of how it's tied.


Ditto.

In reply to mike swann:



You'd think so but he awkwardly calls it the Double Figure Eight Loop - ABOK 1085

In reply to Fman:

Just a small observation: If a figure of eight is used, or the Yosemite bowline, with the final tail end pointing down the live rope, then it is possible (and I have seen it happen numerous times) to grab the tail instead of the live rope when reaching down to clip the rope in. The bowline and Edwards bowline has the tail tucked away from the live rope, therefore eliminating this potential problem. Of course this potential problem can be eliminated for the figure of eight and Yosemite bowline by tucking the tail rope back into the knot too.
Final small point: If the figure of eight and Yosemite bowline have an additional stopper knot, this does make hang-dogging up as close as possible to the runner not as high as knots without the stopper knot blocking the "take-in".

In reply to M. Edwards: Interesting point, can't say either have ever affected me tbh!

In reply to M. Edwards:
The bowline and Edwards bowline has the tail tucked away from the live rope,

So it is with a normal bowline and stopper. What's the advantage of any of the bowline variants over this knot?

Just curious like.

In reply to Max factor: Over the standard bowline + stopper?

Yosemite bowline (which I use btw) is more stable than a standard bowline (without stoppers), which is only stable when kept under reasonable amounts of tension. Personally I'm prepared to take 5 seconds more when tying on in order to have a stable base knot. I'd like to think that if I forgot my stoppers, or they came undone, then my yosemite bowline wouldn't unthread itself, which standard bowlines have been known to do in the past if stoppers are not used.

In reply to stewieatb:

thought it would be something like that. I started using a bog standard bowline + stopper know for sport climbing as it is easier to untie; now I'm getting lazier and tie in all the time for with it. Probably not best practice on long multipitches but not had a problem with stopper knots coming loose yet.

In reply to stewieatb:

Are there really people who use a bowline without a stopper knot? Where would they learn such a thing and why doesn't anyone explain the potential dangers?


Chris

In reply to M. Edwards:

Mark,

You'd need a tail like a Kangaroo for that to happen. How could they? Why would they?

They'd have to be the Homer Simpsons of the climbing world, firstly to tie in in such a cack handed way, and then clip it.

Bemused of the North East

In reply to stewieatb: I tend to use the Edwards simply because of the way it is illustrated on this site, rather than forming a hole for the rabbit you put a bite though the loop and then trap and pull through the other side on the rope (please see ukclimbing's photos as that's such a bad description http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=4 )what this means is you can't form the loop the wrong way which is an easy thing to do and therefore have a self untying knot. You can't do the Yosemite from this as the tail is on the outside of the loop, so that leaves the Edwards.

In reply to Chris Craggs: I was more referring to people forgetting or the stoppers being poorly tied and coming undone than people consciously deciding to use a bowline without a stopper.

In reply to SteveSBlake:

To Bemused of the North East,

Some people are just greedy when tying their knots...they press themselves against a vertical wall...fumble for their rope...wrong rope...and off!

Sometimes you just have one chance to make that crux clip.

Seen it from Costa Blanca

In reply to M. Edwards:

Mark,

Perhaps it's Darwinism inching its way into sport climbing?

Steve

In reply to SteveSBlake:

Steve,

Hopefully its a once only mistake. Although (off the subject) I do know of one Spanish climber that decked because his rope was short for the route (no knot on the end)...not once but twice in the same month! Some species just take longer to adapt I guess.

Mark

In reply to Max factor:

i had a stopper work loose before because the end of the rope was pushing against my harness. this seems more likely with a normal bowline as the stopper is on the loop connected to the harness and the end fot he rope points in towards you.
on a fig 8,yosemite or edwards the end of the rope come out of the knot pointing away from the climber..

In reply to steveshaking:
You can get the rope to be on either the inside or outside from the "rabbit-less" method, it just depends on weather you go up or down through the loop with the end of the rope.
I always go up to leave the tail on the inside of the knot, as I remember someone once sayng this was a touch safer as the tail was less likely to snag and unflip if your stopper comes undone, and I've never seen a reason for doing it the other way

In reply to Fman: I have started to introduce this method with my MRT training and the guys have picked it up easily.
The point to all this being that the Bowline was originally a mariner knot on hawser laid rope (the 'twist in the rope allowed the knot to jam against itself) - it was then adopted by climbers on their hawser ropes - remember the British Ropes No.4 'Full Weight'?.
Once we started to use kernmantle ropes we found it readily undid itself, if not tied firmly. So, we had to put in the stopper knot. This modification is important but too easily mis-tied so the alternative shown in your posting is a better finish.

ps: I could start a another run by suggesting that the re-tied figure 8 doesn't need a stopper know but that would really set the Pigeons alight!
aye Andy

In reply to pottsworth: Genius, of course, Rabbitless Yosemites from now on.
Steve

In reply to pottsworth: Rabbitless Yosemites, fantastic!

In reply to Max factor:

Hi Max Factor, sorry missed your question, so here goes...

I think it has already been covered above now, but here goes: With the normal bowline and a stopper-knot, it can be said to look bulky or untidy looking. There is the point if the stopper knot loosens due to miss tying etc., then obvious dangers there. The figure of eight looks tidy, but has the disadvantage of becoming very difficult to untie after a fall etc.. Furthermore, the eight can prove a hassle to untie when rescuing an unconscious leader and requiring their end of the rope after their weight has been taken off the knot, to start an abseil with them.
So, the Edwards knot was really invented to give a tidier, easy to undo knot after a fall etc... Hope that helps?

In reply to pottsworth:
I've used all sorts of knots over the years and as far as I can see the Edwards is just about the holy-grail of tie-ons. It's a yosemite with an extra tuck. This means that two trapped tucks have to work undone before the "naked" bowline is left, versus one for either the Yosemite or stopper knot finishes. It's unbeatable as an "all-day" knot that won't jam under load.

A couple of other details. Firstly, having the initial bowline tail on the outside of the loop makes it more stable under a cross-load - one of the weaknesses of the bowline. The other point is perhaps more esoteric. The extent to which a knot weakens the rope is determined by the radius of the initial turn that it makes upon entering the knot - the smaller the radius, the more it's weakened. I notice that for a both a simple bowline and a figure of eight (no matter how well "dressed") the turn is around two strands of rope. With an Edwards it's around three. I don't know it for a fact, but I would surmise that the Edwards weakens the rope less.

I'm surprised to see that some people think the Edwards is complicated to tie. I agree it's not really a beginners knot because it's difficult for an instructor to check visually. But then I'm not a beginner and neither are most of you.

As for that "rabbitless" bowline - weird!

In reply to Chris Craggs:



I belayed a French friend who launched up The Minimum tied on this way. He didn't seem to share my alarm. He had been the French Junior Climbing Champ so should perhaps have known better.

In reply to Andy Long:
Your point about the tail-on-outside bowline resisting "ring-loading" (pull on eye as though a sling) is worth reiterating. (From time to time the difference between inside/outside is questioned; this is a significant aspect of the difference.)

Also the three diameters vs. two in the center, although here it matters just how they come to be positioned; the difference in strength is likely academic at best. A couple tests (specimens) have been shown only a small gain -- need more testing.

But the Edwards Bowline is needlessly complicated for the benefit;
one can do better --i.e., get a more secure-when-slack knot-- with the End-Bound Dbl. Bowline (EBDB), or various simple extra wrap-&-tucks of the tail around the eye legs, such as shown by Prohaska.
cf. http://i3.tinypic.com/wjwh1t.jpg

The EBDB is quite simple to tie. (The similar extension to the single bowline can work but is less sure in firm rope, being harder to set & stay tight.)

*kN*

In reply to knudeNoggin:
With nothing to do after watching the Grand Prix (yeah, I know it's a nice day but I'm stuck inside with a nasty chest infection), I've just spent a happy hour tying EBDB's, janus, cowboy janus & mirrored bowlines along with their variants, as you suggest. Many thanks for that, but I think I'll stick to the Edwards. I like its double redundancy as well as the nipping-loop-round-three. One question though - who the are the International Guild of Knot Tyers and what the hell do you have to do to get into it...not that I'd want to you understand.

In reply to Andy Long: Was wondering this when I saw the writer of a mate's knot book was apparently a member of this. I honestly can't believe they exist for any reason other than to accredit each other's books. It should be noted that the author in question was pictured with a beard large enough to nest a heron in and a neckerchief.

In reply to Andy Long:
As they say, "each to her own" (they didn't say "her" so I'm aiming for balance .
But I'm surprised that the EBDB doesn't seem both simpler and surer (more secure).
As for the Mirrored Bowline, that would leave the tail sticking away from the eye, an issue objected to by some, here; ditto, those "Janus" ones.

Another simple ploy is to just take a long end back through the harness a 2nd time, and finish with the "rabbit's" around the tree tuck -- gives 4 diameters in that central space. This then would have to untie (if accidentally) by having the tail first pop back down (if leading) out of the center, then go up and out (then leaving a regular bowline, with lonnnng tail), and so on -- with the long untying end being a signal to something amiss, if ... !

As for the IGKT, they came about on the publishing of a "new" end-2-end knot (which turned out to be published in a knots book in '60s), and are seemingly predominantly folks keen on the more artsy knotting, "fancy work"; and many who have some kind of nautical nuance (or affectation). But they also serve as a point of gathering for those interested in practical knotting. YMMV.

As for knots books.
A look back through these can reveal some hilarious plagiarisms and goofs and ... make one wonder "if the author ever tried to TIE this!?". Really, it seems so much of the "research" that goes into a book is the reading (and uncritical believing) of prior books. Obviously wrong (as in *impossible*) images get produced/approved/published and then replicated; stupid assertions echoed (well, the Net is much faster at this); and myths given archival ink. And for some reason the market seems to keep bringing out "Complete Knots" 101 books (rather than corrected versions). There is one such book proclaiming new artwork as its gift to the world, and in fact its images are simply scanned copies from other books! (rendered in different hue by computer ...) Yep, one can see the exact shapes and even mistakes all neatly copied for this new (and, chuckle, copyrighted!) artwork. super...
In specialized knots books (e.g., angling, climbing), one tends to get authors with at least hands-on knowledge of their immediate subject, but often ignorance of the greater domain. E.g., climbers tend to not be so in touch even with cavers and less so arborists, who nevertheless use somewhat similar cordage (esp. in knot names there is confusion!).

I didn't reply to some above remarks, but with fingers on keys now ... :

UNCURLING bowline main loop: yes, this can happen, and yields NOT a "slip-knot" but a Pile Hitch (around the mainline); you can see this by tying the knot loose with an ample "collar" and manually uncurling the loop. It seems to happen: in trawler heavy mooring lines I've come across often enough to wonder if that form of the knot was actually desired! -- and not in lines heavy and stiff, where drawing up the knot might be difficult manually, but in quite flexible lines!? The tail-on-outside bowline better resists this capsizing, but it hardly seems evident in climbing (including in rope tests which put breaking forces on the knot). Possibly a mooring line's friction around a pile and shifting angle of incidence could result in concentrated force on the curl; or simply the large rope diameter ... ?!

As for pulling on an end and creating a Slip-knot: well, then you're held by that end; if the end is released, there's a good chance that the slip-knot will revert to the bowline -- that is, after all, one way to tie the knot. I don't know of any instance where this deformation happened, aside from some knot-tyer's demonstration of it as a vulnerability to be avoided.

*kN*

In reply to knudeNoggin:

I've done a fair bit of googling on bowline variants over the past few days and there are many.

The problem with the basic bowline is that it can work loose with time.

The options for increasing the security of the knot are:

1) Add a stopper knot with a long enough tail

2) Tie a double loop variant eg double bowline, water bowline, to make the knot less likely to slip

3) Pass the free end in some way through part of the knot in an attempt to secure it eg Yosemite, Edwards, numerous others...

4) A combination of these eg double bowline with yosemite finish. You can even add a stopper as well if you are of a nervous disposition!!

What I couldn't find on my googling was any meaningful strength testing of bowline variants against one another or against a rethreaded figure of eight. Several sites stated that a yosemite bowline was as strong as a rethreaded figure of eight but none gave any scientific data or figures to back this up.

What's needed is for someone with a suitable test rig to pull test the common bowline variations and the rethreaded Fig 8 both axially and across the ring to tell us once and for all which is the most secure knot for tying in.

In reply to Alan_2468:

I should add that a knot that is very complicated to tie will be of limited practical use.

If it could be proved that one of the simpler bowline finishes is as strong or stronger than the rethreaded fig 8 then that would be very useful information.

In reply to Fman:

Double-loop bowline with yosemite finish, no stopper required. My standard tie in for a couple of years now. Very fast to tie in (much faster than rethreaded fig-8), easy to undo, safe and secure. What more could you ask?

In reply to Fman:
Just to add yet another variant into the mix - I've used the Double Bowline with a Bowline backup ever since I saw it demonstrated in Climbing magazine 10 years ago
https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/ro/www/ClimbingClubatUIUC/bowline.html
seems to tick all the boxes -
- increased internal radius, which as someone said above is reckoned to increase the knots strength
- stays secure all day
- short tail which doesn't come out the same end as the main rope
- although the article refers to it as a sport climbing knot, I use it for trad as well, and it makes a small tidy knot, especially in a half rope
- easy to untie after lowering or a fall.
As the article says, it takes a little practice to tie but soon becomes second nature - haven't fallen off the end yet!

Cheers
Andy

POINT ! This needs to be understood well: it CAN do this, somewhat YMMV on many factors. It is NOT a reason to forego "the bowline" in general, but a reason to take a precaution --and there are many ways to do so-- against such loosening; one can still have the good benefits of the knot (easy tying AFTER sizing the eye (nothing to "pre-tie" like a Fig.8), easy untying after heavy loading).

>1) Add a stopper knot with a long enough tail
>2) Tie a double loop variant eg double bowline, water bowline, to make the knot less likely to slip

Here, your words can confuse: "double loop" = (/=) "double EYE" ?
Your examples manifest /=. *Slippage*, per se, isn't so much the problem as here as a sort of *expanding* of the knot into a (too) loose form. As much loosening can occur with the "Dbl.Bowline" (rabbit hole doubled), but a given amount of opening of this double turn requires now twice the external, back-into-knot material and so resists opening as much.
(NB: this bowline was shown just *flowing* eye material out of the knot by slow rotation of the double loop, in pure, 12-strand HMPE rope !!! amazing (eye collapses to nil)!)

There is, as noted above, the variation of putting in a 2nd eye, making a fully redundant finish to the knot (one could e.g. bring the tail up into the knot on the 2nd eye and then go directly above the knot and tie off with the Strangle ("half a Dbl.Fish") knot).


What the Water Bowline, and its similar-themed "mirrored" extension & Mirrored Bowline do is keep the eye leg that comes directly from the mainline reasonably snug to the knot body and this greatly inhibits loosening. The so-called (because it's like placing a mirror immediately across a bowline's eye legs facing the knot boty) "Mirrored Bowline" has is a Larkshead ("foot" for the wrong-headed / girth hitch at its center, tail making those "around the tree & back into the hole" wraps at both ends (around mainline & its corresponding eye leg)


Or if you just have that much tail to tie up out of the way. Using various knots will move the folding/compressing of this "live end" of the rope across a broader area and so distribute the wear over using the same tie-in repeatedly. --some small benefit?


A fair question is how meaningful strength is at all -- assuming, quite reasonably, that ANY knot will break in dynamic rope only well beyond forces that will wreck your body!?
Moreover, the sort of testing best fitting rockclimbing is dynamic loading (drop testing), and not the usual sort of slow-pull testing that is commonly done. Dave Merchant (author of _Life on a Line_ knots booklet) asserts that his testing found that e.g. an Overhand eyeknot had fairly consistent strength between slow-pull & dynamic loading whereas the Fig.8 and more so the Fig.9 showed lesser strength on dynamic loading; he conjectures that greater rope movement in the more bulky knots leads to more movement and frictional heat. For slow-pull testing, though, confer Dave Richards's information (nb: the top two bar graphs are flipped -- that labeled for "12.5 Static" is with the 10.5 dynamic data and vice versa). Note that one does NOT know how the Fig.8 was loaded (which "end" was "tail"/"live", i.e.).
[Knot Break Strength vs Rope Break Strength,
by Dave Richards, Technical Director, Cordage Institute]
www.caves.org/section/vertical/nh/50/knotrope.html

Note other things, too: the variance of a given knot across this trio of cordage; the different Std.Dev.s; the curiosity of testing the "Fig.8" got by TWO tying methods (which if "dressed & set properly" one should think would yield identical knots, but ... ?!) --his "end" & "bight".

And I note that in all cordage the Grapevine (aka "Dbl.Fisherman's") bend is slightly stronger than the Fig.8 eyeknots; but I recall some fellow who did some home-brew testing of end-2-end knots in small cordage (1/4", 3/8") using Fig.8 eyeknots (again, of some unknown geometry) to anchor all test specimens and NEVER did the eyeknots fail ! Richards's data would suggest otherwise, and it might be so, for the different cordage.
.:. One cannot so simply give attributes of strength, etc., to a particular knot form irrespective of material.

*kN*

In reply to knudeNoggin:
Jesus H. Christ!

In reply to knudeNoggin:

Delighted you are still there, kN....

In reply to knudeNoggin:

Is "knudeNoggin" the Swedish for "large brain"?

In reply to knudeNoggin:

Hi, could you clarify the line:

"....the variation of putting in a 2nd eye, making a fully redundant finish to the knot (one could e.g. bring the tail up into the knot on the 2nd eye and then go directly above the knot and tie off with the Strangle ("half a Dbl.Fish") knot)."

Did you mean the knot discussed much higher up the thead (bowline on a bight), the knot linked to by Andy Cairns (called a double bowline with bowline finish, although I'm not sure that the finish is a bowline - it looks more like a half hitch through the knot), or something else?

Thanx

In reply to Alan_2468:

I mean that you tie a bowline (nothing more/less),
and now, having left a lonnnng tail,
you take the tail through the harness points again,
and finish either as for a bowline (rabbit goes through the hole, around the tree ...)
or just back "through the hole" and then --the tail going in the direction of the
live line-- tie off to the live line (as some do with the tail of a Yosemite bowline).

As for that "DBBB" ("DBBwl Backup"), and the point

I think what he meant was similar to the "Janus" moniker,
that the knot, if viewed as though a cookie-cutter image
through a close-up lens, is *the same coming as going*
(i.e., one could reverse which end made the eye, which the
live line) --ONE step before the end gets finally tucked.
Otherwise, yeah, "bowline back-up" begs an explanation.
(The "Mirrored Bowline" would better merit that name.)

*kN*

In reply to knudeNoggin:

I stopped using the "vanilla" bowline (which I'd been using with 2 loops) when I'd twice had stoppers (tied properly and with plenty tail) work loose on me on multi-pitch climbs.

OK, you can remember to check the stopper at every stance, but it's one more thing to forget.

So I looked around and tried both the Edwards and the Yosemite. I settled on the Edwards as it just seemed more "natural" to me. I can't see why people think it's complicated to tie. I was shown how to do it once and once only, found it dead easy, and being a fat git, simple to untie when I'd weighted it (which is why I migrated from figure 8s to bowlines in the first place). The end's tucked away and I never have to worry about any part of it working loose.

The only downsides have been when mutually checking tie-ins etc, partners unfamiliar with it may think I've fluffed a figure 8, and at climbing walls requiring a tie-in demo, where you sometimes need to explain it to the wall staff.

Even that's not a big problem. A few years ago 4 of us went on our first visit to Westway. We had our induction and each tied in with a different bowline (normal, double loop, Yosemite and Edwards...pre-planned). We staggered our entries as we arrived at slightly different times. I was last in and a bemused staffer said "You know, I've worked here for 2 years and never seen anyone tie in with a bowline. Now I've seen 4 in one morning". It was only later, when he saw us all together, that he twigged

In reply to Rob Naylor:

Hi Rob,
Love your story about you and your three mates at the climbing wall.

I have introduced many Dutch climbers to the Edwards knot over the years, and they have continued to use it back at their climbing walls where figure of eights are the official knot". It also looks like an eight, so they can get away with it. Its like we have a secret society. Its also nice to be different and knowing there is a reason behind it too.

Mark

In reply to M. Edwards:
Mark,
Did you or your dad actually invent it? Or at least come up with it independently (since every knot's almost certainly been devised in the dim and distant past). Congrats anyway for bringing it to a wider public.

In reply to Andy Long:
Hi Andy,
I guess you could say we both did, but I have to say my dad (Rowland) stuck with it the most. We both where looking for an alternative to the bowline with a stopper knot and the variations.
What I personally like about the Edwards bowline is that it really does look solid and a tight knot. I agree with folks here that it takes some practice, but I think that really depends on the individual obviously. I remember showing the knot to a beginner having never climbed before, and he got it after one demo. Well he was a Harrier jump jet pilot and possessed a learn quick brain, very impressive though.
I'm pleased you like the knot Andy.
Mark

In reply to Rob Naylor:

I was told by one of the floorwalkers at the Westway that she didn't recognize my bowline (a yosemite bowline) and therefore I couldn't climb with it

I asked her if I could use an ordinary tied off bowline and she told me that she would prefer if I used a fig8.

In reply to Fman: I am not going to comment on the fancy bowlines listed here but I did notice a few comments about stopper knots coming undone. I always used a double bowline with half a double fisherman's as a stopper. The stopper never came undone or even loosened. It is easy to cinch down close to the main knot and is quick to tie. I can't see any reason to using the overhand knot stoppers that I assume are what people are having come undone.

can I introduce a new variation to the bowline?

the Green Bowline!!!

A water bowline with a janus bowline finish - it's even better that the edwards bowline!

by the way, the DAV only approve the use of a rethreaded bowline or a water bowline.

In reply to Dominic Green:

What is the DAV?

In reply to Fman: The edwards' version just completes the doubling of the knot in my reading - a further round turn and reeve after the yosemite bowline.

In reply to Alan_2468:
Deutsche Alpenverein. German Alpine Club. You do not have to obey them.

In reply to nigelp:

Just depends on the floorwalker. I was once told the same at Craggy Island, but just said "check with Danie whether an Edwards bowline's OK...she did my test when I joined and passed me on it".

In reply to M. Edwards:

Hi Mark! I case you hadn't twigged, I'm the big Rob who hangs out with Kevin.

In reply to BigBrother:

Nope...the ones that I used that worked loose were the fisherman's type you describe. And they were cinched tight to the knot, which was at that time a double bowline. Newbies to our club will know how I shout at them when they tie the stopper knot 10 inches from the main knot!!!

I never had any problems with the stoppers loosening until I did some long climbs...8 or 9 pitches. After it had happened twice on longer climbs I thought "either you build in a stopper check at every stance, or find a new knot". Since an extra check is something extra to forget, I went with the knot change and have never regretted it. Only time I might use a regular bowline in future is if I have to tie on one-handed for any reason.

In reply to Rob Naylor:
I sort of agree with you, Rob. I use Yosemite Bowline regularly, and it is the standard knot for me in any single-pitch climbing.
However I had one experience during multi-pitch climbing, where I spotted my Yosemite Bowline to be loosened. Since then, I stopped in any multi-pitch climbing using Yosemite Bowline and switched back to Figure-of-Eight, which has never come loose ever, to tie the rope to a harness. (I have never tried Edward Bowline, so I can't comment it.)
I have little faith in stoppers knots --- they can be undone easily in the course of a day or even in a pitch, which I have experienced and spotted countless times. No matter how snug you tie the stoppers knot, it can happen seemingly. I nevertheless always use a stoppers knot, even in Yosemite Bowline, as it gives an extra safety, but I wouldn't rely on it.

# BTW, your story at Westway is hilarious, Rob!! Love it

In reply to Rob Naylor:

Hi Rob,

Yeah, thought it was you. Tell Kevin to get over here (Finestrat)...and why don't you join him too?

All the best,
Mark