Talk:Grief knot

Untitled
I think there are two different versions of this knot. Check this out (a knot I discovered one day by experimentally tying two sheet bends together):

http://kidsquid.com/misc/whatknot.jpg

The above knot, when loose, can be manipulated into the wikipedia grief knot. However, when tied as shown in the above picture, it binds tight when the long ends are pulled. I attribute this to the two dangling ends. When the what-knot on my page is tightened, the dangling ends cross and the knot stays together. It shows no signs of unraveling. In fact, if the ends are uncrossed and the long ends are pulled again, it re-crosses the dangling ends again to restore itself. The grief knot is deprived of this.. You can change between the two "versions" of this knot by crossing the dangling ends twice over.

Perhaps topologically the knots are the same, but this knot reacts very differently depending on the way the ends are crossed. I'd love to hear a more knowledable opinion on this knot's behavior..

-- Never mind! The external link explained this very nicely :) I think I go one step further though, by giving the ends two twists rather than just one.

"Trick Knot" instead of "Bend"
This is a great trick knot. It's primary use is as a trick, or to complete the set in the "Reef Knot Family". It could be mentioned as a REALLY bad bend, but it *is* a trick knot, isn't it? It's mentioned in the List of trick knots already - Adxm 21:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I've moved it to be in the binding knot category for consistency with the rest of the reef knot family. Apparently can be used as a bend in flat material like grass where it's called a Grass bend ABOK #1490, and with the ends pulled back forming two interlocked half-hitchs and seized to become the Reeving-line bend #1459.  However I completely agree that until these variations are pictured and discussed fully, it's probably best to discourage the use of the Grief knot except as a trick knot...  --Dfred 05:30, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

---

Although the Grief knot IS a trick knot and in the unlock position it is totally unable to hold, it should not be forgotten that in the lock position it is an exceptionally GOOD knot, locking up strongly and showing no risk of draw through or deformation. In addition to its stability, the ability to unlock the knot even after moderate loading, makes it in my book a highly valuable knot where its limitations are understood - indeed more valuable than the Reef.

Furthermore, the ability to use this knot to demonstrate both positive and negative 'cogging' makes this one of the 'must have' knots on any training course intended to improve knotting comprehension.

DerekSmith (talk) 15:08, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

---

I agree with DerekSmith. The grief knot in its locked form is as economical in line usage as the sheet bend, and is arguably more secure. When tied with round braided line, the unlocked configuration of the grief knot rolls apart so easily under tension that it is unlikely to be dangerously deceptive. This bend should not be used in any permanent application, but for temporary use under steady tension it is secure, strong, non-jamming, economical, and easy to remember.

--Bh23b (talk) 18:50, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Clarified "portmanteau" sentence
Changed "Its name is a portmanteau" to "Its name is an example of a portmanteau" (when I first read the article, I thought the knot itself was alternatively named a "portmanteau knot"!)

Mtford 00:27, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Simpler method of tying
Existing text:

>>To tie the grief knot, create a bight in the end of a rope, with the standing part on the left and the free end on top. Then take the other end, and pass it up through the bight, over the top of the bight, down and up through the bight again to go over the bottom of the bight, and then finally up through the bight to come out where the end first went in. The second end has thus taken an anticlockwise tour of the bight, going alternately under and over every line it encounters.<<

Suggested text:

>>To tie the grief knot, tie a single overhand knot as if starting a square/reef knot, then thrust the two free ends together down through the center of the overhand. Twist the free ends to form half hitches to lock, twist the other way for the granny-like configuration that rolls apart when the standing parts are pulled.<<

Reason:

The existing text is a literal description apparently derived from a picture of the finished knot. The suggested method is extremely easy to remember.

Help please:

I'm a newbie, so I'll leave it to others to make the change, unless no one responds in the next few weeks. Further editing (e.g., deleting the second sentence of the suggested text) may be needed for compatibility with other paragraphs in the existing text.

--Bh23b (talk) 18:51, 14 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I like it. It is a much more straight forward method.  I put in the article, with a few minor wording changes.  Also prompted me to make some other improvements to article.  Thanks.  --Dfred (talk) 20:30, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Merge from water knot
I believe that this knot is the same as the water knot. That article is quite good, and its contents do not overlap very much with this one. I think both articles would be improved if they were merged into one. —Mark Dominus (talk) 22:46, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * You would need some evidence to show they are the same The Ashley Book of Knots gives them different numbers, they have different applications.--Salix (talk): 06:01, 21 October 2012 (UTC)


 * The infobox on this page says they're the same. —Mark Dominus (talk) 03:45, 29 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Have a look at this animation it makes it very clear they are not the same knot. Our description leaves a lot to be desired which might cause the confusion.--Salix (talk): 07:46, 29 October 2012 (UTC)


 * These two knots (water knot and grief knot) clearly do NOT have anything in common. They are NOT the same! Admin, please remove infobox from water knot page, thx. --SlackPro! (talk) 04:52, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

I've now removed the merge tags.--Salix (talk): 07:25, 27 November 2012 (UTC)