[r-t] St Nicholas Bob

Robin Woolley robin at robinw.org.uk
Tue Jul 31 06:12:42 UTC 2018

Hi All,

Seconds thing first.

I mis-remembered the date of St. Nicholas being first rung. It was 1970 
so this should have been picked up at the time. I get the impression 
that treble-dodging methods were the priority at the time and other 
methods were largely ignored.

However, as Andrew says "..this does not maintain PB lead-end order " - 
yes - "but perhaps the PB order in doubles was an accident" - 
irrelevant. The second reason is adjacency and adding more places - 
34567 - is not the currently allowed 'fix'.

In fact, a currently compliant extension would be &,2. It 
'ticks' three boxes - a pair of places adjacent to the treble and ditto 
adjacent to the back which the Doubles version has - although it is the 
same pair, of course and has PB lead-heads.

However, Alan Barber hits the nail on the head. 'Where does the (lead 
end) dodge come from?' In fact, a fundamental principle has been broken 
here that there is to be no 'new' work is introduced into the extension. 
This is more philosophical than formulaic.

Why would 34567 cause parity problems?

Best wishes

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list