[r-t] Philip's new Decisions, including Wiki page
Richard Smith
richard at ex-parrot.com
Wed Aug 6 23:45:47 UTC 2008
Mark Davies wrote:
> 1. E(B) uses the term "lead", but doesn't define it. I think you need a
> Norwich-like definition, something like "A lead is the shortest section of
> the plain course which, when repeated, generates the plain course".
I don't like this definition of a lead.
Consider the method &34-34.1-2-1.34-34.1,1 -- from the place
notation this looks like a perfectly good treble bob minor
method, and it would easy enough to imagine this appearing
in a peal spliced treble dodging minor and no-one thinking
twice about it.
Looking more carefully, it has the lead-head 145236 which
means (under the current rules) that it is actually a
differential treble bob method. I'm not keen on this
distinction between differential and non-differential
methods as it doesn't reflect the reality of how spliced
minor is actually rung.
But using Mark's definition of a lead, it is worse than that
because the 24-change fragment that forms the obvious lead
is in fact two identical parts. Under Mark's rules, this
means the lead is 12 changes long, and the method is a
differential, not even a differential hunter. This means
that, for example, it can't be included in a peal of spliced
treble dodging minor.
So, for the same reason that I support getting rid of the
differential hunters as a separate type of method and making
them fully fledged 'hunters' (nasty word), I don't want to
see this definition of 'lead'.
RAS
More information about the ringing-theory
mailing list