[r-t] Asymmetric Doubles

[Ted Steele]

  On 05/08/2010 18:25, Philip Earis wrote:
> "Well, a bob of course; but it replaces PN 125 and does not change the
> nature of the rows that would otherwise have been produced. PN 145
> replacing 1 does so. The former example affects 3 bells, the latter just 2"
>
>
> Hmm. First you argued the 145 call should be a single, because it just swaps over two bells (ie a single pair).
>
> Now you say that as it's a call changing the nature of rows means it could be called a single (to which I'd ask, what do you call a 14 call in plain bob major?)


That's why I specified that the change of nature relates to the rows 
"that would otherwise have been produced". Perhaps I should have 
referred to a single changing the order of the progression of the 
positive and negative rows. In PB Doubles the 145 bob does not alter the 
succession of +ve and -ve rows that occurs at a plain lead.  In the case 
of the Harrington Bob Doubles the 145 call does do so.

Ted