Author Topic: Question Regarding Collared Hitch in a book by Mr. Geoffrey Budworth  (Read 374 times)

luke.mike

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Since I am new to the forum I would like to say 'hello' to everyone.
I am writing because I have a problem I am not able to solve by myself. I came across a foreign translation of a book by mr. Geoffrey Budworth, who to me is an expert in the knot knowledge. I seem to have found a mistake in that particular book. I attach the photos of the book. The knot, or rather a hitch in question, has a name collared hitch. I tried to search it online but I haven't found anything regarding it. The problem I have is that Step 3 ('krok 3') seem to be wrong because Step 4 ('krok 4') does not take it into consideration.
Could you please confirm that is in fact a mistake and the hitch is safe to use without step 3.
Thank you.

Images here:
https://ibb.co/YpR6Ldg
« Last Edit: March 20, 2020, 03:02:05 PM by luke.mike »

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1867
Good day and welcome.

Looking at the photo you've linked to, I do not see a wrong depiction of the tying sequence for that hitch.

As for "safe to use without step 3", I would not skip it !

If you are using that hitch for life endangering use, I would add a bulky knot to the tail (leave long as well) and make sure that you are not exceeding the safe working limits of your materials.

SS

luke.mike

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Thank you for the reply.
I think that what happens in step 3 makes step 4 impossible. If you look closely at step 4 you can see it depicts the hitch reversed 180 degrees (flipped). You can see that on the colors of the flat webbing (leading end) (green on step 3 and purple green and blue on step 4). The translated description also says it's reversed.
If so, doing step 3 and than reversing does not make any sense because the end of the rope is on the wrong side. When you look at it step 4 is exactly step 3 (without any action) just reversed. 
If I am wrong please correct me I am really confused with this hitch. Also, why it is nowhere to be found. The easiest option for me would be finding it online and just checking it. But there is no place online that mentions it. Thank you.   

Photo with explanation:
https://ibb.co/gFKkL5S
« Last Edit: March 20, 2020, 06:19:35 PM by luke.mike »

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1867
I believe the written directions ask you to flip it and work #4 step from the new showing side.
That's how I tied it with a piece of rope.
It came out as depicted in the photo.

SS

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3886
Thank you for the reply.
I think that what happens in step 3 makes step 4 impossible.
If you look closely at step 4 you can see it depicts the hitch
reversed 180 degrees (flipped).
 You can see that on the colors of the flat webbing (leading end)
(green on step 3 and purple green and blue on step 4).
The translated description also says it's reversed.

I concur in your good analysis --after initially thinking
that the images were right (but I didn't notice the
flipping).
Scott, don't know how you got it if you did NOT skip
Step 3, which shows the result of Step 2,
BUT has the wrong continuation therefrom --only
the simple tuck, for which the view is flipped so
to see, is yet to be made (and NOT the movement
indicated by the arrow in the image for Step 3).

Budworth has so many books that I used to muse
he should offer a  subscription service.  Alas, there
are many errors in these books (his and others');
image makers sometimes (usually?) have no interaction
w/authors and vice versa.  (In the one book I was a
consultant for, the author who photo'd for the book
himself botched some things, but I only got to see
those photo images at a time too late to re-do,
only to omit (or deny the error, but it's there).
It's sad, shouldn't happen, and goes WAY back
(e.g., to Hjalmar Ohrvall's daughter's botching
the samisen bight-hitch such that fellow Swede
Sam Svensson & Ashley et al. could pronounce
it a "heaving-line bend" rather than it being a
joining of instrument string to a fat soft bight leg!).

((And I can though seldom make my own goophs
  --sometimes this can yield interesting New Knots.
And have hand-written notes I later find unintelligible.))


--dl*
====

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3886
I believe the written directions ask you to flip it and work #4 step from the new showing side.
That's how I tied it with a piece of rope.
It came out as depicted in the photo.

SS
Well, it couldn't have, but for image trickery:
at the point of Step 3 there are already TWO collars
of around the SPart, and the tuck is to be made now,
for which the image view needs flipping to show
(so, just hold image 3 w/arrow pointing towards
tuck, then move to matching opp. view in 4 ...);
doing the erroneous Step 3 arrow'd wrap
would add a redundant collar
(i.e., one atop an earlier one in same orientation).

As for adding further security to this,
that goes along with that general thinking
I voiced re secure tie-ins of wanting the
tail to be pretty *involved* in the knot
vs. some quick in/out as w/bowline, EVEN
given a really secure gripping of it (as done
with the locktight eye knot) --something
to defend against the unknown unknotting
causes!  Otherwise, one could see this hitch
as a doubled Italian hitch locked off, and
amply secure in most instances.

 ;)

luke.mike

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5

As for adding further security to this,
that goes along with that general thinking
I voiced re secure tie-ins of wanting the
tail to be pretty *involved* in the knot
vs. some quick in/out as w/bowline, EVEN
given a really secure gripping of it (as done
with the locktight eye knot) --something
to defend against the unknown unknotting
causes! 

Thank for your input Dan. I was under the impression that books regarding knots, as they are used as reference in life threatening situations, do not have mistakes in them, but from what you are saying that is not the case. Thanks for that information. Regarding the hitch, thanks for confirming my observations, because I started to doubt myself thinking that maybe I cannot follow the instructions properly.
Regarding the additional safety you mention. Would you explaining a little bit more what you mean by writing that "tail [should] (...) be pretty *involved* in the knot". What's the best way to achieve it in this particular case?
Thank you.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2020, 08:18:17 PM by luke.mike »

SS369

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1867
Hi luke.mike.

I am sorry that I may have mislead with my response.

I tied this repeatedly and got the correct outcome.
But, what happened is I actually didn't. I intuitively tied it by ignoring step #3. Just did it over and over.
I think it happened because some time ago I used this for a rope swing, although I did add a stopper with the tail by tying it to the standing part. It is still hanging over the river.
My bad and I apologize.

SS

agent_smith

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1147
Hello luke.mike,

You might find these links to be of some interest because it is essentially the same structure:

https://www.animatedknots.com/super-munter-hitch-knot
https://overtheedgerescue.com/canyoning/get-friction-double-munter/

And in 1944, Clifford Ashley had already published what he called the 'Zig Zag' hitch at illustration #1195 (in his masterpiece 'ABoK').

The Budworth illustration is simply an extension of an already existing and documented hitch.

Climbers/mountaineers also routinely use a 'Munter Hitch' (#206) and the double/super version is simply a duplication (one on top of the other).

This hitch is a 'load control hitch' - meaning that it can be used to lower heavy items under control and it can be used for abseiling.
It is also routinely used as an improvise belay system in climbing.

Anyhow, I thought I'd post this info to give some broader perspective...
« Last Edit: March 24, 2020, 12:37:48 AM by agent_smith »

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3886

As for adding further security to this,
that goes along with that general thinking
I voiced re secure tie-ins of wanting the
tail to be pretty *involved* in the knot
vs. some quick in/out as w/bowline, EVEN
given a really secure gripping of it (as done
with the locktight eye knot) --something
to defend against the unknown unknotting
causes! 


I was under the impression that books regarding knots,
as they are used as reference in life threatening situations,
do not have mistakes in them,
but from what you are saying that is not the case.


Sadly, it is not.  BUT, *parochial* books --ones done
by practitioners in the filed-- are generally better,
the authors having actually used the knots they''re
presenting.  (Still, though, there can be goofs of
illustration, and more.)

--a quote from Pieter van de Griend:

Foremost deduction seems to be that there is a lot of simply dumb
propagation of nonsense.  Knot tyers (and especially knot authors!) dumbly
propagate initial falsehoods sufficiently often to establish them as truths.
Why?  What comes into the system (i.e. books) is what gets propagated. 

A Letter to Lester

Quote
Regarding the additional safety you mention.
Would you explaining a little bit more what you mean
by writing that "tail [should] (...) be pretty *involved* in the knot".
What's the best way to achieve it in this particular case?
Thank you.

Well, SS_369 gave one way.  What I mean
is that in some knots the tail makes a quite
limited entanglement --e.g., in the bowline
(a knot that is quite limited/concise overall!)--
and one can fear such a simple finish becoming
UNfinished by some who-knows-why loosening
or loading.  The locktight eye knot that I devised
has many wraps around the SPart & tail, but
the tail still must goes in & back out --a bight--
as for the bowline.  So, one could be concerned
about that in some situation, I suppose; that the
tightly set wraps might over time and int some
new still material just loosen, and then ... .
Whereas the mirrored bowline has a back'n'forth
of tail passes much harder to come free.
So, too, the fig.8 eye knot which can lose its
final tuck and yet work.


--dl*
====
« Last Edit: March 27, 2020, 11:36:55 PM by Dan_Lehman »

luke.mike

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Question Regarding Collared Hitch in a book by Mr. Geoffrey Budworth
« Reply #10 on: March 26, 2020, 07:49:29 PM »
@Scott, no problem whatsoever, thank you for clarifying this, I thought I was doing something wrong.
@agent_smith, thanks for the links and finding similarities with Super Munter Hitch.
@Dan, thank you for the explanation, would you mind giving a link to your locktight eye knot, I'm having problems finding it on the forum.

Little update. The day before yesterday I received an email from the book's author explaining what might have happened. The people who describe steps of tying a given knot very often get confused when the knot (or as in this case hitch) is rotated 180 degrees. They simply miss it. It seems that this was the case and in order to make a logical progression between step 3 and 4, the editor simply added the arrow without consulting the author. Author was not responsible for the mistake in any way.

Thank you very much for your help guys, I very much appreciate it.
« Last Edit: March 26, 2020, 07:50:38 PM by luke.mike »

Dan_Lehman

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3886
Re: Question Regarding Collared Hitch in a book by Mr. Geoffrey Budworth
« Reply #11 on: March 27, 2020, 11:42:42 PM »

@Dan, thank you for the explanation, would you mind giving a link to your locktight eye knot, I'm having problems finding it on the forum.

Voila
OK - original sketches to get us started:



Russ
The "II" version was designed to handle stiffer
ropes (such as found in caving kernmantle),
so the U-turn of the tail bight is softened.

(And the number of wraps is variable per need.)


--dl*
====

luke.mike

  • New Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Question Regarding Collared Hitch in a book by Mr. Geoffrey Budworth
« Reply #12 on: March 28, 2020, 08:58:55 PM »
Thank you Dan. :)