Ashley calls this bend "
The worst Single Carrick bend ", and he does not show its reverse. Miles spents a whole chapter discussing its symmetries ( rather, its asymmetries...
) ( M. ch.7.2. p. 137 ), and he calls it "
Lesser Carrick bend ". Asher whimsically calls it "
Boobash bend " ( KM 11, 1985, p.16-17 )
However, as anybody can realize by himself in an instance, if this bend is properly dressed and pre-tightened ( or, of course, if it is seized, but let us not discuss this option here ) it becomes a quite secure compact bend - the smallest bend there is !
The question is : Which of the two forms, the "normal", loaded as Ashley shows, or the "reverse" ( where the Standing and the Tail Ends of the "lower" link are swapped ) is the safest ? Which slips less, if heavily loaded - because, as they are obviously different, they should behave differently, and this difference will manifest itself during heavier loadings.
If we learn which slips less, then we will be able to find an ad hoc "explanation" of the fact - because I can not see any way to predict the outcome of such a test, or to think about how this supposedly most simple mechanism really works ! That is telling of how inadequately we can "analyse" even the most "elementary" knots...
P.S. The simplest / dumbest way to tie those bends I always follow, is to first tie the Granny and the Grief / Whatknot knots, to which we are more accustomed, and then un-tuck the "over" or the "under" leg of the one link, and re-tuck it through the same opening of the other link, but now going "under" or over", respectably, of the other leg.
