[r-t] Proportion of Surprise Methods

[Richard Smith]

Don Morrison wrote (quoting me):

>> [...] Phil Earis' view is that Yorkshire should not be a 
>> surprise method. And, whilst I'm not sure I agree with 
>> him, I can see a lot of logic in that position [...]
>
> Would it be possible to explain that logic?

I expect Phil can explain it better himself, but basically I 
think his view is that, if you have separate classes, then 
the classes should have some use or contain some useful 
information, whether to composers, conductors or ringers. 
At present, treble bob does have some use: it tells a ringer 
that they will never make a place immediately next to a 
dodge with the treble (with the possible exception of a LE 
or HL place).  On six bells, surprise is similar: it tells a 
ringer that they will always make places immediately before 
and after passing the treble (again, with possible exception 
of at the LE and HL).  And on six, delight is useful too as 
the default bin to put methods in that are neither surprise 
nor delight.

On eight bells or more, the distinction between surprise and 
delight is no longer useful.  Millennium S Max is a good 
example of why.  Sometimes you make places on both sides of 
the treble (e.g. 5ths place bell passing the treble in 
9-10), and sometimes on neither (e.g. 10ths place bell 
passing the treble in 5-6).  Imagine you're ringing it for 
the first time and are about to run out of line, or reach a 
part you can no longer recall.  You're probably trying to 
piece together enough of what you can remember about nearby 
place bells and the method structure so that you can get by.

If you were ringing an unfamiliar treble bob the very fact 
that it was treble bob would be a big help; similarly, on 
six bells, knowing you were ringing surprise would be a 
help.  But I would suggest that most ringers would be unable 
to use the fact Millennium S Max was as surprise method to 
help themselves if they've fallen off the line.

So by making something like Millennium or Yorkshire S Max a 
surprise method, you are devaluing its use for things like 
Cambridge or Bristol S Max.

> Also, in this alternate view, is there a distinction 
> between the classes of, say, Yorkshire Surprise Max and 
> Millenium Surprise Max?

No, I don't think so. As I understand Phil's suggestion, 
there are still three classes for treble dodging methods: 
treble bob (which is unchanged), delight (which is 
considerably broadened) and surprise (which is significantly 
narrowed).

RAS