per Dmitry:
Is it some kind of bowline or not?
I think you at least deserve a reply that has a little more substance.
The first thing I want to point out is your tying diagrams. The sequence to arrive from 'tying2' image to the final form appears to be incorrect. Either a step is missing or your labeling misses something. The final form cant be arrived at from the maneuver indicated in your 'tying2' image.
The second part is in relation to the definition of 'a' 'Bowline'.
The classical concept of [a] 'Bowline' is depicted in ABoK (Ashley Book of Knots) at illustration number 1010 (or simply
#1010).
But, Ashley also shows #1012 and #1013.
So we can see that variations are permitted - and still carry the title of 'Bowline'.
So the question one could ask is; "How much variation is possible before a structure is no longer permitted to identify as [a] 'Bowline'?
Based on hundreds of posts from the likes of Dan Lehman, Xarax, Derek and others, I advanced the following hypothesis:
1. All Bowlines have a
'fixed eye' (as opposed to a noose like structure which cinches tight and isn't 'fixed')
2. All Bowlines have a functional
'nipping loop' (which must be loaded at both ends)
3. All Bowlines have a
'collar'.
4. All Bowlines are
resistant to jamming (and this property is linked to the role of the
nipping loop) and the role of the collar and its 2 'legs'.
If any of these 4 elements are missing, the structure is not deserving of the title 'Bowline'. Each of the 4 elements are holistic and inter-dependent. The jam resistance of all Bowlines is a key to understanding its structure. Any knot structure that is prone to jamming should automatically raise red flags and set off alarm bells. I have yet to learn of [a] 'Bowline' that is prone to jamming (but this is how science is done - maybe someday, someone will discover a 'Bowline' that is
not jam resistant!). And this will force me to revise my hypothesis
So, if we start from #1017 (Anglers loop) - it immediately fails the test of 'Bowline' on account of having no functional
nipping loop. It does have a fixed eye. As for a 'collar' - it gets confusing here - but, there are additional qualifying elements for a proper collar. For example, a collar has 2 'legs' and both of these 'legs' must re-enter the 'nipping loop' (either from the same direction or from opposite directions as with #1033 Carrick loop). The SPart of [a] 'Bowline' also acts as a bracing post for the collar.
In my view, there is no proper collar in #1017 Anglers loop.
Also, the Anglers loop is not resistant to jamming (because there is no functional nipping loop and no proper collar with both
legs re-entering the nipping loop).
Now, with respect to your creation, I am unable to directly arrive at this structure from your 'tying2' image. So, I enlarged your final photo to get a closer view of the structure.
I can only comment based on the photo - which is a little difficult to follow (my computer screen is a small laptop).
To answer your question, based on the presented image - it does appear to have the required elements of a 'Bowline'.
I will try to tie it again from your diagram to see if I can figure it out.
But,
1. There
appears to be a functional 'nipping loop' - but this needs closer examination to confirm.
2. There appears to be a 'collar' - but, it also appears that both legs of the collar are not fully encircled by the nipping loop - which also needs closer examination.
Summary:Your creation
might be deserving of the title 'Bowline'. Will comment further after I have had time to properly analyze the structure!
EDIT NOTE: I am unable to comment on your creations
resistance to jamming. I have not tied it and loaded it to determine the load threshold at which jamming occurs.
Maybe you could do this for me? Can you load it to a significant degree to investigate its resistance to jamming?
Remember that a key property of all 'Bowlines' is resistance to jamming.