[r-t] Yorkshire Surprise Minor, etc

Phillip Barnes phil at piltdown.org.uk
Sat Mar 18 18:19:43 UTC 2017


All of which begs the question - why the obsession with classification rather than description? We have a descriptive technique - i.e. place notation. Do our attempts to classify by anything apart from treble course have anything other than an arbitrary basis?

What is the argument for their retention?

Answers relying purely on history will receive no marks ;-)


> On 18 Mar 2017, at 17:38, Graham John <graham at changeringing.co.uk> wrote:
> 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
> Graham
> _______________________________________________
> ringing-theory mailing list
> ringing-theory at bellringers.net
> http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/listinfo/ringing-theory

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list