[r-t] Yorkshire Surprise Minor, etc

Richard Pullin grandsirerich at googlemail.com
Sat Mar 18 14:22:10 UTC 2017

When looking through the Methods Committee proposed changes, and having a
further look at this page on Tony Smith's site http://www.methods.org.uk/
online/blk5.htm , I noted with interest that the contractions of Pudsey,
Rutland, and Yorkshire Surprise to Minor have already been named as Minor

If the propositions are carried through, we will then legitimately be able
to ring 1440s of Yorkshire, Rutland, and Pudsey Surprise Minor.

However, each of these Minor methods contain a 16 cross section, so they
are Delight methods. Does this mean that we might also have to relax, to a
degree, the distinctions between Surprise, Delight, and Treble Bob?

After all, Yorkshire Surprise Minor is a logically self-validating
contraction of Major and above, whereas the subdivision of Treble Dodging
methods is only an arbitrary human decision. Clearly, it is irrefutable, by
logical deduction, that Yorkshire S Minor is the contraction of Yorkshire S
Major, regardless of our contingent subdividing of Treble Dodging methods
which would dictate that it is a Delight Minor method.

The only obvious solution is to relax the distinctions between Surprise,
Delight, and Treble Bob methods - or at least in circumstances, such as
these, where they conflict.

Has this dilemma ever arisen before, or been previously discussed on this
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/ringing-theory/attachments/20170318/75f46305/attachment.html>

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list