In article ,
wrote:
snip

When I first posted here, some 4 years ago, it took me more than 5 minutes
to KNIT a row of 100 stitches. Now, I can knit a row of 100 stitches in as
little as ~35 seconds (1.7 sps). When I made my first knitting sheath last
fall, it took me half a minute to move from one working needle to the next.
Small changes to the design of the knitting sheath (and some practice) have
reduced the time to change needles to less than 3 seconds. (Yes, Dennis, you
got the first of the faster design.) That faster needle change is not
"racing." It is working smarter. It is getting more done with less effort.
I try different things and I measure to see which one offers better results.
Am I the only one here that says this approach is common sense?

The standard for modern competition knitting has evolved to use 4 mm
needles, and DK yarn to produce stockinette fabric on 60 stitch rows. It has
been reasonably pointed out that under those conditions, the current world
champion can only knit/purl 255 stitches in three minutes (1.4 sps) and the
record is only 355 stitches in 3 minutes (1.97 sps). But, I am not a
competition knitter and I will never be fast enough to be a competition
knitter. So, I do not train for those conditions, and I do not time myself
under those conditions.

Hazel Tindall (the current world champion) does not train for competition.
She just knits, the same as she always does.

It would be very interesting to see what you could do with 4mm needles.

snip
Thus, *the rules of the knitting competitions are set to exclude the speed
knitting tools and techniques of traditional hand knitters*.

A good traditional knitter can adapt to whatever size is available,
according to the product wanted.

Second, I time myself on a single straight knit row. The Champion's time
was for very different and more difficult task. You can not compare
"Quarterhourse Race" times to "Steeple Chase" times, and you can not
compare my straight row times to the Champion's time. They are very
different tests.

True, it is a more difficult competition. Nevertheless:

My knitting one row is more similar to the rules for 19th
century speed knitting, when they knit rounds so there were needle changes,
but no turns or purling.

....the 19th century knitters did knit flat and do purling on the yokes of
the ganseys. The "knit round and cut steeks" method is Scandinavian,
not traditional UK. Those heat-retaining knit-purl patterns require purling.

Before we dismiss the reported speeds of 200 stitches per minute for 19th
century speed knitters as unlikely, let us think about this for a moment.
At that time, contract knitting was a profession with tools, methods, and
supplies optimized for fast hand knitting. Many thousands of people were
trained in specialized methods of speed knitting, and they were highly
incentivized to knit as fast as possible.

That's overstating the case. Contract knitting was a subsistence-level
job, done in spare time and with whatever you could get. Supplies were
optimized for the merchants' profit - yarn was weighed out and the ganseys
were weighed when they were turned in. Needles/pins/wires were often
badly pointed, soft non-springy steel that stayed bent, or even cheap
iron. Most knitters were taught to knit, but not taught to knit fast.
The "furious knitters of Dent" did train children to knit very fast
but it was not successful with all children, and their training method was
to set conditions of speed and let the children flounder until they either
managed to discover some method on their own that produced fast work or
gave up and ran away. I would bet that most of those methods were very
stressful and hurt their hands. They didn't have the time to experiment
and find better ways, nor did they have spring steel needles to add speed.

Those speeds of 200 spm were not for modern
contests of back and forth production of stockinette on fat needles - it
was knitting rounds on fine steel needles, with knitting sheaths, so the
spring of the steel finished the stitch in a flash,

No, the needles bent and stayed bent. Surviving antique needles from
those gansey knitters are curved like a bow when nobody is touching them.

and they were using the fastest yarn available.

They used whatever yarn was available that would sell. Some merchants
supplied the yarn. Other gansey knitters (in the Netherlands, for instance)
used the cheap local yarn, yet the same "200-stitches/minute" story is told
there.

We do not even teach speed knitting any more.

We teach it to each other, voluntarily instead of by fear of starving.
Knitters discuss methods here and in other Internet locations - weblogs,
discussion groups, etc - methods for efficiency, methods for reducing
RSI, etc.

The Shetland production knitters do knit fast, but *traditional Shetland
yarns do not lend themselves to real speed knitting*. Thus, Shetland
production knitting is not the kind speed knitting with *wassit* that
was practiced by contract knitters of the Channel Islands or Cornwall
or The Dales.

Traditional Shetland yarns are a bit thinner than traditional gansey
yarns were; ganseys were considered thick sweaters. Shetland yarns
may allow faster knitting because they don't have to have every end
worked in immediately to prevent raveling.

Moreover, real speed knitting
tools are not allowed in the knitting competition. Thus, modern knitting
contests are not a reflection of what was possible in days past, or even a
reflection of what is possible today with real speed knitting tools and
materials. Who knows, in a year or two, Dick, or myself may even break that
magic 600 stitches in 3 minutes mark (3.3 sps). Or, maybe Wooly will be the
first one to knit a BLUE STREAK, if she can find a fast enough yarn. (HINT)


Today, we want yarns that "feel good." When was the last time anyone in
this group selected a yarn primarily because it knit fast?

Well, you did. You're in this group.

A knitting sheath will almost double your knitting speed, but
who uses a knitting sheath any more?

You do.

We no longer select hand knitting needles just because the are very
fast. We are not hungry, so we want needles that "feel good."

We want needles that don't give us RSI. I seem to recall your posting
a few years ago about how wonderful dogwood needles feel, and how they
let the yarn move smoothly along.

'Addies" are not the fastest needles out there,

They certainly have that reputation, though.

but who, here can stand up, and say confidently say, "My needles
are faster!"?

You say that.

These days we do not knit fast because we do not really try.

Do not blow off claims of fast knitting just because you have not put
thought into what it would take to knit fast.

You don't know how much thought I have put into it.

snip
Unless you have really thought about knitting fast, then you can not
judge the validity of claims about knitting fast.

I can judge the likelihood of mistaken estimates, especially when the
identical myth is claimed by several different areas.

(This reminds me strongly of the fact that modern horses, timed by
accurate stopwatches over measured miles, somehow never match the
speeds reported for certain horses in the 19th century.)

They were not handicapped and thereby were carring less weight than modern
horses of the same classs. 60 pounds can make a difference : )

Some of them were carrying more weight - heavier saddles, bigger jockeys,
running before the change to saddles that held the weight over the
withers instead of the mid-back.

If you don't want to try the international competition, why not
go for the Guinness record? All that takes is contacting them, and
knitting in front of a reliable sworn witness with an accurate stopwatch.
Then you could use all your preferred methods, tools, and yarn.

=Tamar