[r-t] Methods Committee proposed proposed changes

Don Morrison dfm at ringing.org
Tue Mar 21 22:26:02 UTC 2017

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Ted Steele <teds.bells at tesco.net> wrote:
> Consider the common case of a peal containing a simple 720 of PB6
> which is two bobs-only 360s joined by singles. A missed or incorrect
> call at halfway will obviously invalidate that as a true extent. No
> amount of subsequent correction of the calling error will alter the
> fact that the extent and thus also the peal is false.

No, I don't believe that this is correct. Simply carry on ringing the
subsequent second in course 360. When you get to the end of that, call a
single, and then ring two out of course 360s, ending with another single.
You've just rung a perfectly acceptable 1,440.

Had you set out to ring peal containing this 1,440 it would certainly have
been acceptable. Whether or not you consider making such an emendation on
the fly equally acceptable is a matter of taste, and, unless the conductor
has announced beforehand what she intends to call, is based on something
known only to her.

Don Morrison <dfm at ringing.org>
"Bureaucracy is the epoxy that greases the wheels of
progress."    -- James H. Boren,  _When in Doubt, Mumble_
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/ringing-theory/attachments/20170321/6827eef0/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list