[r-t] Definition of a peal

Don Morrison dfm at ringing.org
Tue Aug 5 15:31:27 UTC 2008

On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 11:01 AM, Graham John <graham at changeringing.co.uk> wrote:
> Why? This comes under my definition of variable cover, which is treated as
> rows at the higher stage. It is a round block at the higher stage.

No, I don't think that is quite the same thing.

When we are ringing mixed, small stage peals we are *not* extending
the smaller stage to the larger stage for purposes of computing truth.
It is not uncommon to ring more rows ending with the tenor than other
rows. For example, a peal consisting of six extents of Plain Bob Minor
and six extents of Grandsire Doubles, all of the latter rung with the
tenor covering.

This is allowed today, and is in practice actually rung sometimes.

There seems to me no value difference between that and ringing five extents
of Bob Minor, followed by five extents of Grandsire Doubles, followed
by 60 changes of Grandsire rung PBPBPS, followed by an extent of Bob
Minor starting and ending with the row 132456, followed by another 60
of Grandsire picking up the missing 60 rows of doubles. But I think
your formulation as a true round block would prohibit this.

And this is not a purely hypothetical issue. I have myself rung things
like this in quarter peals.

Don Morrison <dfm at ringing.org>
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."
     -- Martin Luther King, Jr, "Letter from a Birmingham Jail"

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list