Shawl pattern help

[firemanshunny]

Has anyone done this Ripple shawl on the Lion Brand website?? I have tried it and I can't get it to work out right. If you just read the pattern it doesn't make sense. I tried to work it out on paper too. That was no help. It says that the shawl is worked in multiples of 11 plus one extra stitch. Ok I get that but than it says to chain 91!! That is not a multiple of 11 that's a multiple of 10 plus one extra stitch!! I hope someone has done this shawl. There is no correction on the website!!

[deneen]

Heather-

 

I have done this and so have several others on here, I had no trouble, but I followed it exactly. Have your hh read it to you as you do the first row, sometimes that helps.

[firemanshunny]

I am going to try it again tonight! There is just something I am not getting about it! Thanks for the tip!

[mrsvickers]

I have made this shawl many, many times and it is a multiple of 11+3. The pattern is incorrect. By the way, this works up beautifully in Homespun with a starting chain of 69.

 

Danielle

[Julie]

Oh cool! Thanks Danielle, I'm going to print it out for my pattern binder and make that notation. I'll never remember and it's a definite goal to make that one someday. <img border=0 src="http://img28.photobucket.com/albums/v84/crochetville/veryhappy.gif" />

[firemanshunny]

I got it!! I got it!! I tried it again last night and it just happened and I got it! I had to do the chain of 91. Thanks Danielle 11 + 3 makes more sense and I have a ton of homespun that I can use to make one. That is a good idea! Thanks.:cheer2

[jingles96]

Wow - that's a lovely shawl! That's for pointing it out (and the corrections). I just printed it out. I have a friend I want to do a shawl for and I think this would be perfect!

 

Thanks!

[goldi316]

The reason it's confusing is because 2 of the chains are actually counted as a double crochet. In the pattern instructions under notes, it says

 

Chain 2 at end of each row counts as 1 dc

 

So technically, you are adding a "chain 2" at the end of your foundation chain, even though they aren't specifically telling you that's what you are doing. When you start on row 1, you are making your next stitch in the 3rd chain from the hook, the first two chains are your "first" dc. So, to figure your "multiple of 11 plus 1", you first have to subtract 2 from the 91, and then the numbers work. They could have been more clear about that!

 

It takes a bit of mental gymnastics to figure that out, I know. I suppose it's easy for me, since I work with numbers all day (I do accounts payable in my day job)! :hee

 

That said, something like this is easy for me to figure out. But for the life of me, I can't count my stitches across a row straight. I've got 3 projects going right now that I've spent more time frogging than stitching, because my counts keep going off. :eek2 It's getting downright demoralizing! :th

[mrsvickers]

:thinking2 Why not just say 11+3? It's a lot less confusing.

 

Danielle

[goldi316]

You're right, it's probably less confusing. It also might have been better if they had explained what those extra 2 chains were about, but I've noticed that Lion tends to write their patterns in extreme shorthand, which often makes it harder to understand, especially if you're new to reading patterns. Part of the reason for that, I suspect, is an assumption on their part that the crocheter will be able to figure that out - but that's only the case with folks who have had the benefit of years experience reading the odd shorthand and knowing what all the givens are. It's definitely poor pattern writing on their part, but what can you expect for free?

 

I'm trying to think if there would be any unintended consequences of changing the formula from the 11+1 rule to 11+3 (as far as modifications go) and I can't think of any good ones, but then again, I haven't had my first cuppa yet I'd say there's no harm in changing the pattern to make it less confusing for future projects with it (might be good to note what those extra 2 chains are for, though, just in case).

 

I have yet to try this pattern, though it is on my extra-long list of "wannado's", so this little discussion has been very valuable for me. I will have to make sure and note this on my copy of the pattern, so I don't forget.