Wiley Horne--So. Calif.
I wonder if there isn't more than one way to ensure that you've not left any of the old ragged edge. Larry himself said that the method of removing wire edges after each stone was preventative, i.e., to ensure that the full effect of each stone had been gotten before moving to the next.

A little anecdote....Years ago, one of the tool gurus (might have been Scott Nehring) suggested an alternative to directly removing the primary wire edge you get off the coarse stone. And that was to just move on to the second stone. In fact, don't back off til you get late in the second stone or until the final stone.

No theory was given for this procedure. But what I noticed upon trying it, was that you weren't breaking off a primary wire edge that was still noticeably hinged to the edge--and leaving a ragged blunt place when the hinge broke. As you work through the stones (without backing off), the hinge is getting progressively thinned, and generally floats away more or less intact at some point. Further, and this was on Japanese irons, you weren't unnecessarily reworking the back that had already been flattened and polished long ago.

I still like this procedure. Because once I get down to virgin steel upon formation of the primary burr, I don't want to create another blunt end by breaking off burr, right at that moment. Seems better to just keep going, thin the hinge, save extraneous rework of the back, and let the wire just give up and fall off when its time comes.

For those using waterstones, I suggest this is a good method, because if you break off the 1000g stone's primary burr, and then follow with an 8K to 12K finish stone, you're counting on that final stone to not only remove the scratches of the 1000g stone, but also to hone away the ragged place left by breaking off the burr. Seems to me it's better to back off toward the end after the hinge has been much thinned.

Not arguing with what anyone else does. Just an alternative.

Wiley