[r-t] Restriction #4

Tim Barnes tjbarnes23 at gmail.com
Sun Nov 30 00:45:56 UTC 2014

> MF:
> As I remember I gave a short opinion that this is a senseless rule, with
little obvious foundation or defence, and that the only sensible limit
should be such that all bells must move at least once per lead.

I agreed with the restriction of limiting the number of consecutive blows
to one less than the lead length when I first read it, but what about the
scenario of, say, ringing covered doubles simultaneously on the front 6 and
back 6 of a 12?  One could imagine a less experienced band at a 12-bell
tower wanting to ring this sort of peal to mark a special occasion.

E.g. the place notation for 'dual bob doubles' would
be 56E.167.56E.167.56E.167.56E.167.56E.125678E, so the 6th stays in the
same place for a whole lead, but this could produce a true peal of Cinques
with the right calls.  Should this be allowed as a valid Cinques method?
Is there a better way to describe this type of ringing?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory/attachments/20141129/2aefe3e7/attachment-0004.html>

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list