[r-t] Hubbard, etc

[edward martin]

On 19 June 2012 12:07, Robert Bennett <rbennett at woosh.co.nz> wrote:
>
>  On Tue 19/06/12 7:31 PM , edward martin edward.w.martin at gmail.com sent:
>
>  My theory is that if there are no more than two interruptions to an
>  initially plain course then you'd be ok, more than that causes
>  problems
>  Ed
>
> I think that is getting close to it.
>
> I think that:
>
>  (1) any touch which uses complete courses is adaptable between Plain
> Bob and St.Simons.
>
> (2) any touch which uses calls at W,M and H only is adaptable.
>
> (3)most peals based on bob courses of St.Simons cannot be converted, since
> peals of Plain Bob Triples can't have more than 240 bobs (???).
>
> (4) touches where the same course is cut into 2 parts,with the
> parts rung backward and forward can be adapted. e.g Hubbard's 10-part.
>
> (5)long touches or peals where the same course is cut into 4 or 6 parts
> with the bits being rung alternately forward and backward may not be
> adaptable.

This is getting a tad tedious.
My theory is not merely close, it's spot on

comments on your points:
(1) This is true
(2) This is false. eg  always call bobs at WMH in plain bob yields a
touch of 5 courses; try to do  this in St.Simons & you get a touch of
2 courses.
Bobs affecting the 7 (In, Out & 4ths) when a complete Q-set will
certainly be ok provided that none of these three courses is
interrupted again by more than one more bob.

(3) (4) & (5)
PLEASE realise that the 5040 is best set out in 360 plain course
structures and that as far as the treble's leads are concerned, within
any particular plain course, exactly the same rows will occur at
treble's leads whether ringing Plain Bob or St.Simon's  if there are
no more than two interruptions to any of these  initially plain
courses then the result can be adapted (touches short of a full 5040
may have different lengths ) otherwise the composition might well fall
into several parts.

Eddie