[r-t] Call names (was Asymmetric Doubles)

Alexander Holroyd holroyd at math.ubc.ca
Fri Aug 6 22:34:36 UTC 2010

Sorry, the -'s should be E's in that place notation.

> OK, consider the little surprise cinques method &-5-4.5-5.36.4-4.5-4-8, 1
> The pn is identical to bristol major, and it has a regular mx lead end. (This 
> is a silly method, with 8 blows at the back; one could probably modify it to 
> get something more reasonable, but this is irrelevant).
> Ask a ringer-on-the-street what the natural calls should be, and I suspect 
> you will hear:
> bob=14E, single=1234E
> However, according to the proposed "legislation", the former is a single and 
> the latter is a bob!
> I completely agree with Philip on this.  Bobs and singles are merely names 
> for calls, and there is no need for definitions.  How many innovative new 
> methods have gone unrung because the band wasn't sure what to call the call? 
> None, methinks....
> Ander

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list