UKC

They dont like me using a bowline at my local wall. But I prefer it to a figure 8 because you can undo it easily when your fingers are wrecked. And you are never going to take a massive fall, not with a runner every 3 feet. So its not going to be subject to massive loading.....or am I missing something?

That debate again

The reasons for walls not liking bowlines are not the risk of failure if tied correctly together with a stopper knot.  They are:

- It's easier to tie it wrong, either by missing the stopper or something wrong with it.  A Fig 8 will most likely not untie if tied wrong - even if it's only through 2 parts of the knot it almost certainly will even without the stopper.  Whereas a bowline doesn't need to be very wrong to be unsafe.  It's also not just about whether it's been tied wrongly, but if you've got distracted, started to untie then changed your mind and climbed.

- It's easier if wall staff (floor walkers) only need to be trained in recognising issues with one type of knot.

I'm open minded on it, TBH.  I used to use one but don't any more.  No particular reason why.

What you're missing is that they are wanting you to get into the habit of using only a figure of 8 when leading, because it is really by far the safest simple knot for leading. The bowline is great for top-roping, but inferior, weaker for leading. To enlarge on that: in the old days of hemp ropes there were cases of leader falls where the rope snapped at the knot (because it was so strong and so unabsorbent of shock), and it actually became known as a 'cutter knot'. The figure of 8 can absorb much more impact and is also a lot easier to untie after a big impact. And yes, the bowline can be tied wrong much more easily.

I'm finding the 'dislikes' here a bit odd, because all I'm doing is trotting out most/all of the standard reasons why the figure of 8 is preferred for leading. I really don't think there's much controversy here, is there?

That's an interesting view, I thought the point of using a bowline is when taking lead falls it is possible to untie the thing without waiting for your forearm pump to go...

The whole bowline/fig 8 debate is irrelevant to this. When you sign up to climb at a wall you agree to abide by their conditions of use. If that includes using a certain knot then so be it.

Though that doesn't mean we shouldn't have a discussion on the relative merits of that rule and why walls might impose it.

I very much doubt you'll damage a modern rope with a bowline before the fall is so severe you damage yourself - it's very widely used in sport climbing for ease of untying, and sport climbers aren't dying all over the place because of it.

However, there is another thing it's inferior for in (trad) leading, which is that it isn't good for ring-loading, unlike a F8.  Whether this is an issue obviously depends on how you set your anchors up.

Yes, yet another good reason. 

It seems like a good idea to stick to one standard knot for leading.

Another thing I can remember so well is that we always checked each other's knots before a serious climb. And you can see virtually at a glance whether the figure of 8's been done wrong.

I agree completely with this. My son and I always check each others knots. He uses a f8 and its easy to see if its right. I use a bowline and he says he cant tell if its right. Sadly I even enjoy the process of tying a bowline more than a f8!

A very very quick look on google yeilded breaking strains on 10.5mm dynamic rope at about 14kn with a bowline, and 14.5kn with a fig8. The bowline is not a weak knot. I don’t know of any instances of someone falling off and the rope snapping because of the weakness of the knot, but i haven’t done much searching either. 
 

i think everyone can agree it’s a perfectly strong knot to tie in with. As has been said, it’s main advantage, and the reason why so many sport climbers use it, is because once youve loaded it hard, it’s still easy to untie after   you’ve taken the stopper out. The fig8 isn’t so easy. As has also been said, it’s not the best to ring load it, so don’t clip yourself in via the loop (no idea what the breaking strain in, probably not as low as you might imagine?)

Also, what I'm saying is that my opinions are based on a teensy-weensy bit of experience. In 1966-67, I started with the Alpine Butterfly and/or the bowline directly round the waist; in late 67-68 we used the Tarbuck Knot; in 1969-70 we used the bowline for tying into the first harnesses, then in summer 70, the figure of eight for clipping into the harness with a krab. Thereon, from late 1970 (or 1971?)-2007 (when I stopped climbing), the figure of eight tied directly into the harness.

PS. You'll probably be interested to hear that I'm still a great enthusiast for the bowline. It's such a great knot. And that thing of just tying into the climbing rope round your waist with it (as at s/e sandstone), it took me c. 2 seconds, and it was just such as lovely feeling ... In my later climbing days, when I was walking along past a crag and saw some people doing a climb, sometimes I said 'Do you mind if I have a go'. Meaning to second. And they'd say 'Have you got a harness?' and I'd say no, and just tie on round the waist with a bowline in about two seconds. They looked a bit shocked. There was this concern about not having a harness, even for seconding. For years on s/e sandstone top-roping we never had harnesses. The beauty of it was that it was just so fast and simple. Another advantage was that, if you failed, you couldn't faff about for very long, resting on the rope. Typically, we had something like a 'two-minute rule' then you were lowered. In the Thames Valley CC in late 70s, the standard procedure was virtually a controlled fall until you were c. 2 feet off the deck. ...

Fair enough.

Fair enough, I just thought it was untrue to let the chap know that if he ties in with a bowline that it was going to snap the rope!

I used to work at a wall and yes fig8 is so much easier to visually check from a distance. That said our rules stated 'suitable climbing knot', so whilst fig8 was generally encouraged bowlines were accepted. 

(Being a fatty I use a bowline!) 

I think the problem with the bowline is that people don't know how to tie or recognise it easily. If I'm climbing I use a stopper knot with it. Having said that I tie my genoa sheets on in the boat with them and I've never had one come undone in over twenty years of sailing despite much flapping about, rubbing against guard rails , baby stay etc etc..

Just effing unbelievable. I put out a post saying that I accept that the figure of 8 knot, on balance (for multiple reasons), is the best knot to use for trad leading, and I get 11 dislikes. Maybe it was something to do with the way I said it If so, sorry to have caused offence!  But whatever was it?

The standard ABC form says "suitable climbing knot" but some walls change it to "follow through figure of 8 knot with a stopper" or somesuch.

One reason they want you to read it properly when signing up for the first time - while it's very similar between walls it's not always identical.

Goodness knows.  I've got fed up of the dislike feature so I've switched it off so I can neither see nor do it.

Like is worth having as it expresses "I agree" without needing to type it.  If you dislike something, reply to it and say why!

You couldn't have read my post properly. I simply reported the fact that the bowline was being called a 'cutter knot' in the 1960s, and I mentioned that this was in the days of hemp ropes ...

The modern obsession with the Fig 8 does irk me a little but I accept that I will have a minority view. I've pretty much only ever used a bowline with stopper, except when required to do otherwise - principally while competing. I continue to do so because IMO it's simply the most appropriate knot for the job. It's quicker to tie, quicker to untie and perfectly appropriate in terms of strength and security.

I see the only real advantages of the Fig 8 as being that it's easier for novices to learn and that it's easier for others to check.

Not being a novice, the former is clearly no longer relevant. The latter is an odd one; part of what I like about climbing is the self-reliance, which I suppose is also why I have always enjoyed soloing too. I know that a simple buddy-check is hardly a great imposition but I'm somehow uneasy about the idea of changing from the best knot to a lesser one simply to reduce my own self-reliance.

And yes, I'm aware that such line of reasoning is probably not going to fit in with modern ideas of climbing safety, but in all the years I've been climbing I don't remember ever having any knot issues, so I really don't see a problem there to be solved.

That, of course, is the really telling point. In the so-called 'old days' we never seemed to have these problems. We just got on with it, doing whatever was reckoned to be the best and safest procedure at the time. There were very few if any angst-ridden discussions about it that I can remember.

I did read it; 

“The bowline is great for top-roping, but inferior, weaker for leading” +
“The figure of 8 can absorb much more impact and is also a lot easier to untie after a big impact”

all I said was the knot itself is marginally weaker than a fig8 but but basically well within the strength required to keep you safe. i would also say that if you load both knots, to say 2/3/4kn, you’ll find the bowline incomparably easier to undo! Both keep you safe, the good thing about climbing is (for the majority) you choose what you want to do

Yes, but then I tie my chalk bag on with a bowline just to show them what an independent thinker I am.

Love it

I would have liked your post, but I just switched it off as well once I learned from you it's possible  

Old habits die hard... (now I am gonna switch it on to see if I get any likes or dislikes, uh oh...)

Nothing wrong with the bowline. It’s perfectly safe.

It should be pretty much impossible to generate an impact force of 14kN on a dynamic climbing rope. More to the point, the maximum impact force the human body can withstand is about 12kN.
 

Yes - all modern ropes can be thought of as infinitely strong, because if you ever manage to generate a force even vaguely approaching their maximum tensile strength, the question of whether the rope has survived is quite a long way down your list of priorities.

Gordon, I suspect that the dislikes (none of which were from me) are less to do with the point that the bowline could sever a hemp rope, and more concerning the assertion that the fig 8 is easier to untie after loading than the bowline.

Neil, I'm interested that you bring up ring loading.  I understood that the bowline (tied in the 'normal' way, with a stopper inside the central loop) is just as resilient to ring load as the fig 8. 

I am curious to know if ring-loading is anything related to incontinence in a tricky situation.

 >  A Fig 8 will most likely not untie if tied wrong - even if it's only through 2 parts of the knot it almost certainly will even without the stopper. <

When I first heard this I was sceptical . However I tried and found it secure even when only through one part of the knot (bouncing dead weight, and suspect it might be true for a leader fall). Of course absolutely not safe for ring loading.

I suspect climbing wall insurers have concluded figure of 8 is less prone to human error.

Knot strength doesn't matter to insurers if ropes don't snap at knots and accidents are due to human error when tieing in.

If tied properly, a bowline is only dangerous if it isn't backed up with a stopper knot, because unlike a figure 8 it can unthread itself and come undone. 

The solution to this is to not only put in a stopper, but to tie a re-threaded bowline. This means you are basically climbing on two bowlines, and hence even if you forgot to put in a stopper/the stopper came undone, the knot would have to unthread itself twice for it to fail. And given the amount of tail you'd have hanging around after the rethread knot came undone, I think it would be pretty much impossible for the first knot to also unthread.

It takes about 15 second longer to tie a re-thread than a normal bowline. So I always climb on a rethread bowline for sport/gym leading.

The downside is that you can only do this if climbing on one rope, as it takes all the tie-in point space. Hence for trad I tie in two figures of 8, on two separate ropes. Which is fine, because I'm not planning to lob off (much) when trad climbing so getting the knots undone after a fall won't be the ballache it can be if falling off repeatedly in e.g. a sport climb at max ability.

Also, the bowline really comes in to its own in conditions of high humidity. I learned to tie it in Thailand, after the combination of high humidity + big fall on a figure 8 meant I had to borrow a hammer to get my harness dis-attached from my rope.

agree with your comments.

I think the Rowland Edwards bowline knot where you feed the rope back on itself is a neater and safer method

Climbing wall insurers don't give a flying f*ck if you tie in with a bowline...

Why are we fussing about this? Clearly both knots are good for the main thing and beyond that it is personal preference.

I must admit I didn't know that.  I'll bear it mind next time I'm leading with a hemp rope.  In the meantime I'll keep using my bowline, which has held me safely in hundreds of falls without it cutting the rope, or snapping, or coming unloose, or been tied incorrectly, or succumbing to any of the other spurious rubbish spouted regarding it's safety.

I was interested by this, as a bowline is a ring, so had a look and found this:

youtube.com/watch?v=Mf0wZRxNcQ0&

So, it seems ring loading would only be an issue without a stopper knot, although it seems there's an outside possibility that, even with that, it could collapse itself and shrink the loop under the right circumstances - it wouldn't ultimately come undone.

Because knowledge is good, and frankly I'd rather talk about knots than politics right now.

Oceanrower, Reading wall only allow the rethreaded fig 8 with a stopper; when discussing this with them a while ago I was explicitly told that their insurer specified this method of tying in alone.

Interesting.  What a shame they didn't test with the stopper on the loop (which is how most of us who use the bowine would finish it).

Yet again, I find myself thinking that if I had a day's access to a pull test rig, it would be easy to put all this to rest!

You mean the average human body ! 😉

Nuff the fairy.

I gave you a couple of dislikes -  I disagree that the bowline is inferior for leading, and in fact think it's the far superior knot (particularly for sport climbing). I also disagree that it's best to stick to one knot for leading. I believe that it's better to be adaptable and recognise that there are times when one has advantages over the other - so I normally use a fig 8 for multi-pitch trad and a bowline for sport.

Your post didn't specify trad leading

Cheers, I also found this:

https://www.saferclimbing.org/en/blog/cross-loading-on-knots

which might be the same video?

I suppose with a stopper you could use anything, though, as a stopper would sort of work on its own as it does in prusiks, bar being a pig to untie.

Hang on ,,,, it takes 15 seconds longer to tie a figure 8 but did you forget the second bowline / double bowline you mentioned? ?Surely that's at least another 5 seconds ??  

As for untying figure 8''s, I don't know what all the fuss is about ?

 I've took loads of massive falls , I weigh 13 stone and never had a problem Un tieing my knot!  ???? 🤔

13 stone isn't heavy.

Another vote for the bowline with a stopper knot at the wall for ease of use & a figure of eight knot climbing outdoors. 

I like the idea of a sort of 'Am I bovvered?' Tinkerbell, and now I have Sabbath's Fairies Wear Boots as an earworm... 

I did a belay test a couple of months ago with Reading and tied in with a Bowline, as I usually do. Ditto with Manchester who are the same organisation. No issue was raised.

How odd. I registered in Oct '18 and was failed at first for not putting a stopper onto my fig 8.  When I queried this I was told that the only knot the insurer would allow was a fig 8 with stopper and that nothing else would do, including a bowline with stopper.

Well, the average paratrooper wearing a full body harness! I can’t imagine you’d fare so well in a climbing sit harness!

This makes for interesting reading if you’re into that sort of thing

https://www.hse.gov.uk/research/hsl_pdf/2003/hsl03-09.pdf

Exactly!  Paratroopers are rarely over 10 stone and only take small jumps out the plane into a cushion of air ? No ? 

Maybe because it can come undone if you don't the it off with a half hitch or two, so making the knot more risky for safety conscous climbing walls. 

That may be what the guy (or gal) on the counter told you. It may well be what they told the guy on the counter. But I'll put a decent bet on it not being true...

I very much doubt they have, because they have absolutely no reason to care.  Unless under the wall's direct supervision (eg: a novice being taught by one of their instructors), a climber has no claim to make after decking out as a result of a mis-tied knot.

Accidents in general don't matter to insurers if there is no possibility that they'll result in somebody claiming on the insurance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volenti_non_fit_injuria

^ This is what the 'disclaimer' at the wall is about.  It's not a disclaimer, it's a document that records that you know and understand the risks you're taking on when you come in and climb, one of which is that failing to tie-in correctly may result in you decking out and being killed or injured.  If you have an accident whilst climbing, unless the wall were directly negligent in some contributory way, you have no claim to make.

The knots are good, its the relative likelihood of someone to (mis)use them that's the problem.

That 12kN mostly comes from research carried out on military pilots during the cold war I believe, largely during the development of ejector seats in jet aircraft ,so probably not the 'average human body' no - quite a bit leaner and fitter than that.  (Even back in the '50s & '60s, let alone now!)

A claim is cost even if the claim is denied by the insurer or if has to be defeated in court.

My Dad was failed at Oakwood for tying in with a bowline, as it's against their policies.

I tie in with a re-threaded Fig. 8 for a wall test, knowing that's what they'll be looking for, and then use a bowline with a stopper knot once I've been let loose, unless I'm instructing a group*. I can't remember ever being stopped by a floor walker for using a bowline.

* caveat - I prefer a bowline with small children, as it's a much smaller knot and the stopper won't hit them in the face if they fall off. But then I'd be tying them in anyway.

One of my friends was 'challenged' at a climbing wall for using a bowline as the 'floor walker' didn't know what it was.  oops!

Agreed. BTW, I always used the bowline on s/e sandstone, tying the rope directly round waist, without a harness, for years and years. It was so easy to adjust the tightness, too.  I should add that I've always preferred the bowline as a knot, to the very bulky rather cumbersome figure-of-eight. But for leading (for last 30 yrs of my climbing, up to 12 years ago) I used a figure of eight, because that was the so-called 'preferred' knot, and many climbing walls wouldn't let you use anything else. The other advantage was that you couldn't really tie it wrong, without it looking a complete mess i.e. v easy to check. The bowline can be tied wrong and not spotted - though I must admit I would find it almost impossible to do wrong, it's just so engrained in me.

This isnt a particularly fair criticism. Wall staff are often young, inexperienced and on minimum wage. Couple this with the misguided culture of bowline is bad, always use fig 8. It is not difficult to see how this happens. 

I should have been clearer. It's ultimately the centre's poor staff education I was criticising, regardless of their  age or experience. 

From a systems/human factors point of view I can see a good argument for everyone to use the same knot.  It makes it easier for staff/other climbers to immediately see something unusual or incorrect.