[r-t] A Ringing Puzzle

[Graham John]

Mark wrote:

> Why do we have to call the 2nd's place version of Parkway Surprise Royal
> (-50-14.50-50.36.14-70.58.16-16.70-16-90) a "Differential Hunter"? It's
not
> a differential, it's a Surprise Royal method.

It is called Temple Meads Differential Surprise Royal, so at least it is
still Surprise.

You will note that I didn't discuss how to entitle methods of the suggested
new types, but one answer is that you don't include the type name, as is
still the case for principles and hunters. The type name could be dropped
for Differential method titles too, if it doesn't cause duplicates.

> Similarly, why would we want to call 2nd's place Bristol Major anything
> other than a Surprise Major method? Admittedly the classification may
> be technically difficult, but if you accept it is a method, it seems daft
to
> call it anything else.

I would just call it Horsleydown Surprise Major. 

Allocating these methods a type provides a useful flag when categorising and
searching for methods in databases though, so giving these distinctive
properties a name is helpful. It is also the case for truth in the plain
course. It is also easy to add a flag on a database for methods that are
false within a lead, or are false in the plain course. 

Graham