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*
====
