[r-t] Lead-based methods [was: Poll on consecutive blows in the same position]

[Don Morrison]

On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 6:49 PM, Alexander Holroyd <holroyd at math.ubc.ca> wrote:
> Why not simply say:
>
> A method is a finite sequence of changes.

Because that sounds, at least to my ears, like it is always the same,
finite sequence, which is not the intention. For example, a course of
Dixon's starting from rounds is 64 changes, beginning x4x4x1x1x2.... A
course of Dixon's starting from 132456 is 168 changes, beginning
x1x4x1x2x1.... Yet they are both sequences of changes are are
generated by a single method.

Or am I missing something?



-- 
Don Morrison <dfm at ringing.org>
"Life isn't fair. It's just fairer than death, that's all."
                      -- William Goldman, _The Princess Bride_