Pattern help!

I am new to knitting and am confused about a pattern. Can anyone help???

I am knitting a flower, I am knitting in a round and have 10 stitches on each of the 3 needles for a total of 30 stitches. I then cable cast-on 3 stitches onto the needle after the last stitch. So I now have 13 stitches on that needle and 10 each on the other two needles.

Now the pattern says "you will now be knitting back and forth in rows rather than in rounds attaching each odd row to a flower base stitch".

My first question is do I put all the stitches on one needle??? Or leave them as is???

The pattern then continues on

Row 1: P2, P2tog (edge stitch + first flower base stitch) Row 2: Sl 1, KFB, k1 (4 sts) continued on.......

My second question is how does this end up with only 4 sts on the needle???? Isn't that what the (4 sts) means at the end of a row instructions, that there should be 4 sts on the needle???

I don't get it.

If any one can help, please let me know, I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks,

joannabanana

Reply to
joannabanana
Loading thread data ...

Nope, you've just made 4 sts out of 3 from R 1. Sl the first, k in front and back of the 2nd (2 sts) and k1 for a total of 4. In row 1 you only worked on the 3 sts you cast on plus the last st of the 10 you already had.

Without knowing the rest of the pattern, it looks like you just work on the extra cast on sts, plus one from the other 10.

Hope that helped....

sue

Reply to
suzee

Suzee, How many needles would I be using??

What you said makes sense to me about work>

Reply to
joannabanana

Depends on the rest of the pattern, I guess. Read the whole thing through and see if you can make sense of it, visualizing what you should be doing.

Sounds as though when you're done with R 1, you do turn the work for R

2, working on just those 4 stitches. Leave the other stitches on the other needles alone for now - my guess is you'll be doing something similar with them later.

sue

Reply to
suzee

As Sue said, you'll be working back and forth just on the 3 cast-on stitches adn one from the end of the last needle. You won't need another needle to work it, because you'll just turn the work and go back on the same needle, as if you were working on two single-point needles. Ignore the rest of the stitches and needles. (This is a little like doing a heel on a sock, because you knit back and forth on part of the object for a while before eventually going back to knitting in the round.)

=Tamar

Reply to
Richard Eney

Oooh, that's a much better way of explaining it...

sue

Reply to
suzee

Hi, Joanna(banana) Ok, you'll be working back and forth in that one area, as if on two single point needles, ignoring the stitches on the other needles till it's time to join them, much like turning some heels in sock-knitting. HTH, Noreen

Reply to
Noreen's Knit*che

LOL, you must have been reading the same book as I have! I just finished "The Princess Bride" and one of the characters is always rhyming words.

And just to keep this OT, one of the characters in the book is described as more the knitting-type than the hunting-type.

LauraJ

Reply to
Laura J

OK, is that the movie with Robin whatshername, now married to badboy Sean Penn? Duh, Robin Wright.

My name is montoya blah blah blah, blah blah blah, blah blah blah, and you killed my uncle (or something)....

Noreen

Reply to
Noreen's Knit*che

That's the one (though it was father, not uncle).

LauraJ

Reply to
Laura J

How cool is that? Yep, Father IS right... I LOVED that movie, never even knew it was a book, duh! Have to see if my local Library has or can get it! Noreen PS, loved the french wrestler in the movie too, Andre the Giant... I *think* he's deceased now? I first 'knew' of Robin when she was little sister Kelley on Santa Barbara....wow that's a LONG time ago, grin!

Reply to
Noreen's Knit*che

You know, it's funny, I didn't see that movie until I was in college and by then I had heard it hyped by so many people that I went into it completely biased. I just didn't like it. But DH always said the book was better than the movie so I FINALLY took it off the shelf and read it (though only bcs I was running out of other books to read!). And I really liked it. It's a very quick read so I would definitely recommend it. I don't usually like reading the book after the movie because I then always picture the characters as the actors as I'm reading. But it's been so long since I saw the movie that the only one I could remember was Andre the Giant!

LauraJ

Reply to
Laura J

Laura J. spun a FINE yarn:

The movie was 'immature', but I liked it. Am SURE the book will be better! Hugs, Noreen

Reply to
Noreen's Knit*che

yes, Noreen, Andre the Giant is gone now. There was a biography on him a couple of years ago. Apparently, he was really a gentle giant. He gave the wrestling title to Hulk Hogan by letting him throw him. and his back was deteriorating badly, so it must have cost him a great deal.

Reply to
Norma Woods

Wrestling I know! Yes, Andre the Giant is deceased, although I can't remember how long now. Matthew just left to go uptown for something for me, otherwise I could ask him... he has all kinds of wrestling books and video tapes so he would likely know.

Gem

Reply to
MRH

InspirePoint website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.