[r-t] A ringing puzzle

Fred Bone Fred.Bone at dial.pipex.com
Fri May 23 12:07:50 UTC 2014

On 23 May 2014 at 8:58, King, Peter R said:

> I presume the objection is that the first is false in the plain course
> whereas the second isn't (sorry if I spoilt it for anyone trying to work
> it out). Personally I have no objection to both of them being called
> methods but I think it would would be sensible to have some sort of flag
> indicating the falseness in the plain course. 

Given that, under the proposed change, a "block" is anything that is not 
the plain lead of a method, *both* A and B would be "blocks". As, indeed, 
would be the plain course of Plain B Minor, or two leads of Grandsire, or 

And, contrary to what Don claims, A is not a "method" now (at least, not 
as defined in (E)A.1, which requires truth in the plain course). So it 
can't be rung to a peal.

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list