[r-t] Carter's Odd Bob

edward martin edward.w.martin at gmail.com
Tue Nov 24 15:36:16 UTC 2009

2009/11/24 Paul Bibilo <peb at delcam.com>:
>> 2009/11/23 Samuel M. Austin <combineharvestersam at hotmail.com>:
>> What is the difference between the 1898 and 1902 versions? The one that
>> seems to be the generally accepted one is number 39 in the Stedman
>> collection http://www.ringing.info/stedman.pdf
> Alan Burbidge as the following to say on this matter:
> Carter’s original 1898 peal was the first on his newly-discovered odd bob
> plan and consisted essentially of 4 quarters, all similar but not exactly
> the same. If we call these Q1 Q2 Q3 and Q4 he started with Q1 and joined
> then others as follows.
> Q2 joined to Q1 by extra twin bob
> Q3 joined to Q2 by twin omit
> Q4 joined to Q3 by use of singles.
> The result is that the 2 singles are a 1260 changes apart.
> In 1902 he makes an arrangement, no longer in quarter peals, whereby the 2
> singles are only 224 changes apart (3 courses) and became known as his odd
> bob "one part."
> J Carter called the 1898 peal at Harborne on 17 Dec 1898.
> W H Barber called the 1902 peal at Selly Oak on 5 May 1902 and again in hand
> on 20 August 1902.
> J Carter congratulated him in a letter to the Bell News in Sep 1902.
> The 1898 peal was printed in the Stedman Book of 1903 as a postscript to the
> chapter on Modern Peals, having been received just prior to going to press.
> It was described as being on an "entirely different plan".
> --
> Paul

That is (to me) very interesting Paul because my copy of 'Stedman' ,
1938 on page 58 still gives the original 1898 version introduced by
J.A.Trollope (p.47) as follows:
"Carter's Odd Bob Peal (No. 15, page 55) marked an entirely new
departure in the composition of Stedman Triples, for it is not on the
twin-bob plan, and the whole hunt is affected by bobs. The composer
has not told us on what lines he produced it, but it very well may
have been suggested by Thomas Edwards's peal (see page 131). If so the
way in which the long stretches of consecutive bobs are broken up, and
the special calls and all but two of the singles are got rid of, shows
an ability of a very uncommon kind."

Trollope's speculation is nigh on pure B.S.
I assume that the rearrangement known to Allen but not to me (other
than via PABS's Collection) was published in the Bell News or early
Ringing World.
It is an original composition using 60 true course structures which
cannot be said of Edwards's very false peal.

Eddie Martin.

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list