[r-t] A Ringing Puzzle

[Richard Smith]

Mark Davies wrote:

> However, now I come to read it, I'm a bit surprised by the existing Motion 
> (E). Allowing more hunt than working bells seems to have a bigger technical 
> consequence than the "false methods" case, so I find it odd that the Methods 
> Committee has decided to relax things here and not with the technically 
> easier false methods case.
>
> However, given that they have, it's important to note that Horsleydown 
> Surprise Major would become ringable, but I think would be categorised as a 
> "Differential Hunter" (I suppose no surprise there).

Given how reactionary the Methods Committee is, I think they 
would fight it being allowed.  Their justification for not 
allowing it would be (E)A.1(b):

   A method is defined by the places made between successive
   rows of its plain course, which shall be a true round
   block, divisible into equal parts which are called leads.

I'm sure they would argue that Horsleydown is not divisible 
into equal parts (plural), as it has just one lead.

RAS