[r-t] Plain Bob lead heads/ends (was ringing-theory Digest, Vol 89, Issue 9)

edward martin edward.w.martin at gmail.com
Fri Feb 10 08:15:13 UTC 2012

On 10 February 2012 00:20, Matthew Frye <matthew at frye.org.uk> wrote:
> I very much did read what you said, did you?
> I interpret what you wrote as saying that ALL palindromic methods give pb lead ends, BECAUSE they have the correct bells swapping at the half lead. This should be IF they have the correct bells swapping at the half lead THEN they will give pb lead ends.

I agree that had I better phrased it my intention was to convey that
at the half-lead, if one notes  the pivot bell and the pairs of bells
that switch places AND if  the method is palindromic about the path of
the treble, then a particular set of lead Heads & lead ends is
inevitable For this set to be as in Plain Bob, the working bells must
be in their plain hunt coursing order
This relationship can be seen if you  write out plain hunt on
2-3-4-5-6 noting each bell as it makes a place and the particular
pairs that switch places.
2; 3x4; 5x6
4; 2x6; 3x5
6; 4x5; 2x3
5; 6x3; 4x2
3; 5x2; 6x4

> I think there's a similar confusion RE your twin-hunt triples.

Believe it or believe it not, a similar situation DOES exist with twin
hunt methods where the pivot points are when the 1,2 cross in 1-2 and
in 6-7 (in triples) 8-9 (in Caters) etc

I hope that this is not too confusing but it is a demonstrable fact
that some asymmetric even-bell methods can still have Plain Bob lead
ends & lead heads;
Likewise some asymmetric twin-hunt methods can still have Grandsire type leads
Therefore, to be considered 'regular' it does not seem to be enough to
say that an even bell method must have plain bob leads nor that a twin
hunt method must have Grandsire leads  because these can be achieved
with either palindromic or asymmetric lead blocks.
This is all that I was admittedly struggling to try to get
across...Does that help?


More information about the ringing-theory mailing list