[r-t] A Ringing Puzzle

[Richard Smith]

Mark Davies wrote:

> There is another technical difficulty with single-lead methods: how do you 
> show you have rung them?

How do you show you've rung a lead of Slinky LTP Max?  I 
doubt anyone has ever rung a plain lead of it, as it's 
always rung with a 12ths place lead end.  (It was named 
before the 2002 change to the Decisions to allow 
differential hunters, and the method as named has a 2nds 
place lead end.)

> With leadhead calls, arguably you've rung Bristol 
> instead of Horsleydown

> In leadhead spliced, including both Horsleydown and 
> Bristol would be nonsensical.

True.  Just as we could ring Horton's Four and refer to all 
the bobbed leads of Glasgow as Huddersfield.  No-one is 
suggesting Glasgow and Huddersfield aren't both valid 
methods.  The fact that you can do something silly doesn't 
mean you should.

Imagine you had a composition of spliced major using only 
half-lead calls, and seconds were made at every lead head. 
Suppose Bristol were one of the methods.  Would it be most 
logical to call the method Bristol and pretend to have rung 
a silent lead-end call?  Or to call it some irregular method 
which already included the half-lead call?  Or would it be 
more logical to call it Horsleydown, a method that happened 
to have a one-lead course?

RAS