[r-t] No more than four blows rule

Don Morrison dfm at ringing.org
Sat Jul 19 12:30:23 UTC 2008

While I don't think I've seen any mail going by defending the "no more
than four consecutive blows in one place" rule. But since it does
continue to hold a place in the CC Decisions I presume there must be
at least a fair number of subscribers to this list that think it is a
good idea.

Could one of them explain what the rationale is for this? And in
particular, explain why it is important that we so restrict a plain
course, but why we don't have to so restrict a call? And why it
doesn't apply to minimus?

If calls are for some reason not having to be subject to the same
constraints as methods, should we allow jump changes in calls, even
though they are prohibited in methods? And jump changes in minimus?

Ugh, as if ringing minimus weren't physically demanding enough,
imagine ringing it with jump changes. I think I'd enjoy watching
others do it on a heavy four, though would decline to take part

Don Morrison <dfm at ringing.org>
"The principal difference between heaven and hell is the company
you keep there."                           -- Lois McMaster Bujold

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list