Plait loop - a versatile TIB,EEL, PETEE eyeknot

[xarax]

Playing and tugging at all ends showed in my trials too much movement inside the nub whick can lead to early abrasion of the rope.

   Enhaut, we were searching for an EEL loop, not for an alternatively loadable loop ( ALP ) !   
   If the nub is rock solid during one-after-the-other end loading, it will be rock solid during untying, too...
   However, I am sure that you had tied the knot in-the-end, and you had not pre-tightened it enough.
   I am not aware of ANY other such TIB, PET starting from either end, EEL, easy to untie loop, so, until I learn something, I will keep it in my pantheon.
   The important fact that you may not realize, is that the crossing-knot-based loops  (which are relatively unknown and unexplored ) are always very easy to untie. The nipping structure of a crossing knot is, from its geometry, incapable to "close" around itself, and accumulate tensile forces, like rope-made ratchet. If we do not want to use crossing knots, we go back to the realm of bowlines ( which are more stable ), but then we get much more inner-nub motion...
   See the bowline shown at (1) and at the attached pictures.
   Also, the most interesting fact of the Plait loop, is that it is looks like a plait loop !    ( ( well, if you see it from the proper side !  ). And that means that it is easily, and instantly, inspect-able - one should not underestimate this. In an EEL  TIB loop, the task is to have a loop that can not be tied "wrongly", and be loaded by the "wrong" side, so it means a knot that is easily tied, dressed and inspected.
   I repeat, we want a loop that can be loaded by the one, the other, or both ends, NOT an in-line loop, which can be loaded alternately by the two sides of the long line...

1.  http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4603.msg29705#msg29705
 
   

[xarax]

   I though that all knot tyers would had understood, right from the first post, that a TIB and EEL and PET ( starting from either end ) loop, would, most of the times, be tied in-the-bight, and not in-the-end. However, part of the versatility of this loop is that it can be tied and untied in-the-(one) end, without leaving any "relic" knot in the other end.
   Now, I had seen that people jumped to easy conclusions AFTER the moment I had shown the 2D diagram of the loose knot, which is just a representation of the topology of the knot, NOT its geometry - so, it is not a recommendation of any tying method in-the-end ! I had wished to show the symmetry of the configuration (regarding the two crossing knots before AND after the eye ), which is retained in the compact, final form of the knot, the only form that matters !
   If one tries to tie this loop in the end, he may dress it wrongly, because he will not pay due attention to the simple fact ( which I keep repeating again and again in this thread ), that this in NOT the Farmer s loop, this is a crossing knot based eyeknot, and that it remains such an eyeknot when it is loaded by either end ! Therefore, he should first UNDERSTAND / "see" this obvious fact, and only tie the knot afterwards ! If you do not want to keep the crossing knots, the one or the other, you may straighten one of them up, and tie a different knot !
   I am not sure which is the best way to tie this knot in-the-end - from which of the two crossing knots one should better start to tie it... I guess it will depend on the experience one has with the tying of the particular knot, and tying it with a particular tying method ( one of the many one can figure out ).
   However, given the "purpose" of this loop, I am mostly interested in tying it in-the-bight. And it can be tied in-the-bight very easily, indeed, in a conceptually easy way, during which the knot tyer can WATCH the overall shape of the knot, and see the "upper" bight be transformed into the "higher" collar around the end (1). This is what the "haltering/haltered collar" method achieves. If one ties it following that method, he will not run the danger to straighten out any of the two geometrically and structurally indispensable, necessary, essential crossing knots. - and he will not run the danger to tie the difficult to inspect / ugly Farmer s loop instead ! 

1. Another description of this advantage, at   
   http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4695.msg33927#msg33927

  ( Click to enlarge the second picture )

P.S. 2015-05-17. As Alpineer indicated, the Plait loop can be tied exactly as Ashley shows the tying of the ABoK#1056. Those two loops may be considered as variations of each other, iff any one of them can capsize to the other under heavy loading - or under a special, rare, but possible nevertheless loading ( through this end and that eyeleg, for example ).
After one has tied the ABoK#1056, he just have to "push" the lower collar of it all the way to the top of the nub, and tie the Plait loop. I believe that this is a very simple method to tie it in-the-bight, and, as it is well-known already because of is popularization by Ashley, it may well become the method of choice for most knot tyers. Personally, I can not "switch" my mind yet, because I have learned the method I show in this post, which generates the final Plait loop, without the "intermediate" stage of the ABoK#1056.

[Tex]

Well in your first picture it was clear that it was a bowline but with backwards passage through the hole both times, so yes clearly tying it in a bight is just this.  That's when I realized I had tied this many times, but probably dressed it the ugly way.

[xarax]

   When I say " reeve the whole knot through this bight ", I mean to do what leads to the same result as this act - in fact, you just let the bight itself "swallow" the whole knot, moving it first "downwards", then around the whole knot, and then "upwards" again, to become the collar.
   Dan Lehman calls this a "flype", but my knowledge of the Scottish dialect  tells me that "flype" is something else, in which you do not turn the whole thing inside out, like a glove, but half of it ( the word is used for women s long socks, and the act of grasping the inside heel of the sock and pulling it out half-way, to wear the sock more easily ).
   Ashley uses this technique many times, but he does not offer a name for it. See, for example, how he ties the Double Ring hitch ( ABoK#1126 ).

[Tex]

I was trying to tie this thing with the end of the rope and I instead accidentally tied a loop with a box stitch knot, the first layer of one of these:

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

[Tex]

This seems to happen if the rabbit loses his sense of direction and goes the wrong way around the tree, which shouldn't be too surprising seeing as this rabbit is already very confused to find himself going around a tree after having just gown down a hole.   The interesting thing is that either way around he goes, his result path has remarkable symmetry.

[Tex]

Well I can't tie it through or around something in the bight obviously.  You can tie it in the end.  I don't get the big warning.  It's not a great TIE knot because going the wrong way around the tree does result in the box stitch loop (which isn't so bad), but it's not the only knot anywhere that can be tied wrong. 

[Tex]

Hey if it makes you feel any better, both of your flat layouts told me all the same information for either TIB or TIE.  Once you've tied a few of these the transformation of this information becomes pretty immediately clear, other than maybe getting confused about the direction around the tree, a type of information that our brains, or mine at least, do not seem great at holding on to.  The problem of course is that you must find a reference point to remember it from.  I think our brains are well adapted to remembering how to go somewhere, but it is rare that we find ourselves needing to follow directions around a mirror symmetric city to our own.

[Tex]

If you can not distinguish how to tie a common or an "Eskimo" bowline ( and you still see rabbits and trees... ), please, do NOT tie this loop ! 

I can distinguish those just fine and I think if you cannot distinguish between simplistic and playfully  expedient speech then you should not respond to others with your (mis)judgements about their thoughts. 

I will tie whatever knot I please however I please, and it pleases me to tie this one in the end.  I also don't need your warnings to figure out if I've dressed a knot into a different manner or form. I happen to have two functioning eyes (which informed me of the error, but not the error you seem to think, maybe because you don't know how to tie the knot I describe) and I am sorry for those who do not.  I also don't engage the brain on every single turn of every single knot, because a, it's not always necessary, b, it's just a knot, c) the brain will engage anyway in a second or two when the eyes alert it.   

[Tex]

By the way xarax it seems pretty clear that you find this knot much harder to tie in the end than I do, because I don't find it to be very hard.  Yes, if the hands are left to run loose for a moment without thought or practice there are some wrong ways to possibly do it, but I don't find it to be such a monumental challenge, or really any challenge at all, as you seem you, which seems a little ironic to me, wouldn't you agree?

[Tex]

When you will start tying a number of TIB knots using it, you will see that you would prefer it over any in-the-end method. As I said many times :

I have tied a NUMBER of TIB loops using it and you continue to make assumptions.  I also am very aware of the correspondence between the steps needed to tie a TIB loop this way (even one I've only just seen) and the steps needed to tie one in the end.  Maybe you are not.  Tied TIB can still not pass the loop through another loop or a around a pole with fixed ends.  Not everyone use biners for everything.

[Tex]

Well, I cannot speak for them either nor you for me nor can anyone really even speak for themselves as sometimes we get things and sometimes we don't and with no clear for reason.  This is actually a very well studied aspect of neural networks which all humans posses.  What I know is I am very capable of getting such things, have in many other cases, and that certainly in this instance I do.  I cannot promise to never be confused over such a thing at a later date and mental condition.  Nobody can.  But I will not forget what this PARTICULAR knot looks like dressed correctly vs incorrectly.  As I already told you, I have seen it both ways.

[roo]

  Personally, I can not tell, because I do not know how other people "see" it... I do not ignore that experienced knot tyers, as Alpineer, enhaut and roo, were misled and believed it is identical to the Farmer s loop -
 

Rather than calling it "identical", people have noticed that the loop capsizes into the common Farmer's Loop when the loop is unloaded and the parent line sees tension, as often happens in applications involving midline loops. 

Surely you must have experienced this by now.

[Tex]

As for the TIB preview representation vs fully tied 2D representation, the ONLY difference on which side of the knot (usually SE) the end of the collar resides.  That you cannot imagine that I might be able to imagine the loop of the collar being on the other side from one representation or the other, is very unimaginative of you. 

If anything, the issue of how to dress it seems more ambiguous in the un-collared version, at least to my neural network but in either case is equally easy if you know which dressing you're trying to achieve.  I did not see anything in posts indicating that anyone thought the two ways of dressing it were the same dressing.  Tying it in the end can be more "difficult" I think but not for the reasons you've stated.

[xarax]

...the loop capsizes into the common Farmer's Loop when the loop is unloaded and the parent line sees tension.

   When "the loop is unloaded"  ? Wake up ! This is NOT an inline loop ! Does it look to you like such a loop ?
   Oh, my KnotGod, what people "notice", when they try, desperately, to deny the OBVIOUS !
   Instead, they should do something else ! Or enjoy what they are doing, as they are doing it ! ( That is what I do, with ping pong... )
   LOOK at this loop ! I had provided many clear enough pictures, taken from different angles. Does it seems to you like an inline loop ? Does it seems like the ugly tungly Farmer s loop ?
   I tied a loop that can be loaded by EITHER end, NOT by BOTH ends AND remain unloaded in the same time ! The PET loop ( which the Plait loop replaced in my pantheon, because it is not only PET, but also PETEE ), was also meant to be such a loop, which, if it was loaded only by its ends, and remained unloaded AS A LOOP, would deform into something else.
   The fact that the Butterfly loop can do what you describe, does not mean that all loops should be able to do the same. The Butterfly loop, for example, is not PETEE, not even PET ( because it is two merged slipped overhand knots ), and so becomes difficult to untie after heavy loading.

   Surely you must have experienced this by now...

( Note : I had said it once again, but I will not say it again ! THERE IS NO "PARENT LINE" IN THIS LOOP ! It is symmetric, in structure and function of both the crossing knot that make it, and their limbs )