[r-t] New Grandsire [was Old methods]

[Matthew Frye]

> "A call is a means of passing from one course of a method to another. It is effected by altering the places made between two or more consecutive rows, without altering the length of a lead. It is not part of the definition of the method."
> 
> The Grandsire bob is AN ESSENTIAL part of the method and does NOT pass us from one course to another simply because although what we call a plain course has 30 rows, and there are 4 potential 'Secondary Hunts'  and the extent OUGHT to consist of these four courses joined together by calls, it doesn't!  On paper you can only set out 2 plain courses and even then, they have to be either side of a single. The remaining 60 rows cannot be had by using the plain course structure.

A few points here:
How is a Grandsire bob any more or less essential than a bob in any other method? You need bobs in any method to get an extent (obviously with a few exceptions). There are also probably several possible calls that could generate an extent.
I think if you work it out then a bob in Grandsire DOES pass you from 1 course to another as before the call you are in 1 course and after the call you are in another!
There is no "ought" about an extent, it's anything that gets you through all the changes. Your description of 4 courses each with a different bell in the hunt is nice and does seem a logical way to make an extent, the only problem is that it doesn't work. There are many ways of getting extents and joining a series of plain courses is the probably the most common, usually easiest and most popular way but it's not the only way, eg if you look back on this list a few months you will find a description of an extent of Ocean Finance doubles (not based on full courses) explained.


>  "Methods with hunt bells are known as differential hunters if all the working bells do not do the same work in the plain course or the number of leads is not the same as the number of working bells."
> 
>  Isn't a bobbed lead of Grandsire Doubles what we might call an example of a differential hunter?

Yes, and so would not have been recognised before the decision was changed, which is the main reason that we have the plain lead we know today.

> The simple solution which served us until the Central Council's decisions, was to call the one 'Grandsire' and the other 'New Grandsire' but of course that's really too simple ...

I think that the wider question we're heading towards is should asymmetric methods have different names if they're rung backwards? The current decisions are very clear on this: it's a definite no. Looking at all asymmetric methods (not just Grandsire) from a theoretical point of view, they would probably be considered the same thing, just rung in the opposite direction, from a practical point of view they may well be rung as different things and allowing them to have different names certainly makes describing them easier.
_________________________________________________________________
Find the best and worst places on the planet
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/101719807/direct/01/