[r-t] Yorkshire Surprise Minor, etc

Graham John graham at changeringing.co.uk
Sat Mar 18 17:38:52 UTC 2017

On Saturday, 18 March 2017, Richard Pullin <grandsirerich at googlemail.com> wrote:

> 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?

It has also been pointed out that Oxford Treble Bob Minimus cannot be
considered a contraction of the Minor, as it is a Double method, and
the current extension rules require that property to be consistent
across stages.

and Matt Dawson wrote:

> The Committee could perhaps take notice of Don Morrison's email of a few
> days ago - scrap the lot and start afresh. It's not as if there aren't already
> a group of ringers rewriting the Decisions from scratch!

This type of edge case issue will occur with any classification
system, and starting afresh would not make any difference to that.

I think we have to accept that if we want to retain a classification
system, the rules have to be consistently applied, so even though
these methods seem a natural contraction of the Major, they fall into
a different class at the Minor stage. It doesn't stop us pointing out
the relationship though, and being classed as Delight methods is more
helpful to people than them being classed as Blocks.

Another example is Grandsire at even stages, where it changes from
being a Bob method (albeit with Bob suppressed as a special case) to a
Place method.

30, 10-10-10-10-10- Grandsire Royal
38, 18-18-18-18- Grandsire Major
36, 16-16-16- Grandsire Minor
34, 14-14- Grandsire Place Minimus


More information about the ringing-theory mailing list