[r-t] 5040 Surprise Minor by Roger Bailey

[Andrew Johnson]

> 
> This well-known composition appears in Composition 500 with the claim 
> that it is true to "any method", and is sometimes published without any 
> statement about which methods it is true to.
> 
> 5040 Surprise Minor
> Roger Bailey
> 
> W  H  23456
> 3  3  42356
> -  ss 54326
> 2  3  32456
> 3  -  42356
> 3 part.
> 3=SBB
> 
> (with variations for 6th place lead end methods)
> 
> Is it generally realised that it is not true to methods such as Gangnam 
> Surprise Minor (x3x4x2x3x34.2.3 le 2) which don't have the "usual" 
> pattern of positive and negative rows in a lead?
> 
> When I say "generally realised", I don't just mean whether subscribers 
> to ringing-theory would know. I am wondering about the interpretation of 

> "any method" by a typical conductor.
> 
> 
> Simon Gay
Perhaps not:
http://www.bb.ringingworld.co.uk/view.php?id=333614

It seems that composition has some changes e.g. back rounds 8 times,
but WHW*3*7 doesn't work either (e.g. back rounds 14 times).

Andrew Johnson

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU