Here is a reposting of lot 17, the carpet you are interested in:
I can not add much to the previous thoughts on it published in
Part III of RK's review of the pinner sale. However, let me explain the underlying reason for my opinion.
There is another carpet in an old European Collection that is somewhat similar and which the owner believes to be Tekke. Unfortunately we are not at liberty to post the photo for comparison but after having seen that piece and handled it we do agree with his assessment, i.e. a Tekke product.
Your question is a good one and we thank you for writing in and am sorry we can not offer anything more concrete to support the attribution.
We did not attend the pinner dispersal sale but arranged to have someone look at a few pieces and lot 17 was one. From what we were told the knot was asymmetric open right, in Tekke style, and there were several other tell-tale features also pointing to the Tekke attribution.
Again we are not at liberty to enumerate them, after all there are some trade-secrets RK zealously protects.
In closing we all have to realize the naming of tribal groups, like Tekke, Yomud, etc, as the producers of any extant pre-mid 19th century Turkmen rug is really nothing more than guesswork - there is not one shed of concrete evidence any Turkmen rug of age can be attributed to any known tribe, clan or group.
So with that in mind the only veritable statement one can make about one of these rugs is calling it Turkmen.