[r-t] Great Barr

Robin Woolley robin at robinw.org.uk
Wed Dec 22 10:32:11 UTC 2004

Rather than re-invent the wheel, in hving to plough through all the methods
rung when someone else has done it already, what did they do 'wrong'?

Was it:

i) Ringing, say, Primrose half-lead spliced with Cambridge in opposite
half-leads in the same extent, or

ii) Ringing half a lead of Cambridge in one extent with a similar half
lead - in the sense of 1st/2nd - of Ipswich in separate extents.?

(I know they rang plain, but the choice of methods above  is more familiar
to most of us).

Isn't a fundamental problem here the use of the word 'Compositions' rather
than 'Peals'?

This reminds me of the 500 spliced major in 1983. This was re-named 250
asymmetric spliced and further re-named 497 spliced. I was working abroad at
the time, so could someone remind us of the salient points as to the second

Best wishes

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list