[r-t] FW: Alliance Caters
Earisp at rsc.org
Tue May 4 11:40:58 UTC 2010
Further to Tony Cox's recent email, David Hull has been following a similar path and developing new Caters methods.
He's given me permission to forward this email containing some new compositional and method ideas...
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David Hull <davidghull at googlemail.com>
Date: Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 12:23 AM
Subject: Re: Alliance Caters
To: mark at bronze-age.com
I think I only ever bothered to come up with a composition for one of them.
They are quite false, but it didn't seem insoluble.
5112 Unrung Alliance Caters
D G Hull
23456789 1 7 8
35426978 4 - -
64523 - -
35426789 4 - -
64523 - -
42563 X - -
35264 - -
35642 X -
64352 - -
56342897 - 4
35642978 4 -
64352 - -
23456 - X
X = 2.3.4 (6 leads)
In courses called X, calls at 7 and 8 are really at 5 and 6.
This seemed pretty acceptable, working around little bell courses in the
Others which I came up with more recently, but which I haven't yet looked at
composing peal lengths for are:
18.104.22.168.22.214.171.124.126.96.36.199.188.8.131.52.9 lh129 (nice Bristol-type features)
184.108.40.206.220.127.116.11.18.104.22.168.22.214.171.124.9 lh129 (some nice features in the blue
126.96.36.199.188.8.131.52.184.108.40.206.220.127.116.11.9 lh129 (has a vague feel of Orion about
18.104.22.168.22.214.171.124.126.96.36.199.188.8.131.52.9 lh129 (quite dynamic blue line)
Obviously you can switch the half-leads (189/9) and the lead-ends (129/1) as
Undoubtedly you'll have spotted that they're all double with the exception
of the need to have a different style half-lead and lead-head (I might be
being dim here, but I think my logic is right that a truly double Alliance
Caters method with plain-bob lead heads is impossible, because you always
end up at an "even" lead head and therefore get short courses).
Anyway, I found it quite therapeutic coming up with these and arguably they
ought to be of more than academic interest. Feel free to forward to Ringing
Theory (seeing as I can't seem to post there) if you want.
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 10:54 PM, Mark Davies <mark at snowtiger.net> wrote:
> Hi there David
> I've come up with just this one so far:
> Alliance No.1 Caters
> 184.108.40.206.220.127.116.11.18.104.22.168.22.214.171.124.9 lh 129
> I've just realised something which should have been obvious - due to the
> negative nature of the leadend, most of these are rather false. Not enough
> to stop you ringing them, but enough to make them less than ideal. What are
> yours like - any less false?
> Currently thinking about ways to minimize the falseness, possibly by using
> a LH group that would give an odd number of leads to the course. This isn't
> quite as straightforward as I expected - perhaps why nothing like this has
> been rung.
This communication (including any attachments) is intended for the use of the addressee only and may contain confidential, privileged or copyright material. It may not be relied upon or disclosed to any other person without the consent of the RSC. If you have received it in error, please contact us immediately. Any advice given by the RSC has been carefully formulated but is necessarily based on the information available, and the RSC cannot be held responsible for accuracy or completeness. In this respect, the RSC owes no duty of care and shall not be liable for any resulting damage or loss. The RSC acknowledges that a disclaimer cannot restrict liability at law for personal injury or death arising through a finding of negligence. The RSC does not warrant that its emails or attachments are Virus-free: Please rely on your own screening.
More information about the ringing-theory