[r-t] Fwd: "double" cambridge?

edward martin edward.w.martin at gmail.com
Sat Jan 23 10:58:21 UTC 2010

>From the missus:

---------- Forwarded message ----------

I was looking over Double Cambridge Cyclic Bob.  I was led by the word
"Double" to look for the front-to-back turning point at which front
work and back work are mirror images, such as the full lead in the
"full work" of DNCB.  I was surprised when I didn't find it and
realized that the "doubleness" of this method is of a different sort;
the front work is repeated, not mirrored, at the back, so that exactly
half-way along the course from ANY point you will find the same work
being done in the opposite half, but the same way up, not inverted as
in traditional double methods.  That made me wonder if you could come
up with a method that is traditionally "double" but not symmetrical in
the classical way around the treble ... with left-to-right symmetry
but not top-to-bottom symmetry.  I did come up with one based
originally on Double Cambridge, but I found that the only way to stop
it from being top-to-bottom symmetric was to have different places
made when the treble was going from 4-5 and when she was going from
5-4, i.e. 36 for one and 18 for the other.  Don't we need two words
for these two kinds of doubleness?

"my" method: x16x36x38x78x38x18x16x12

Ann Martin

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list