[r-t] Some good observations from Marky D
poole at maths.ox.ac.uk
Tue Nov 23 10:20:19 UTC 2004
> Chris Poole:
> > Also, Marky asks why should one limit oneself to two types of
> > call? A good question. Why not 5? ....
> Is there anything to stop sonmeone from defining all of the pns in
> cambridge max (for instance) as calls and telling the band that these
> calls are going to be at the 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc. rows of a lead and
> consequently he will not call them all (allowing that part of the
> compositrion to be silent), but will call leadend/head ones. He can
> then say 'go bristol', or anything for that matter including the biggest
> nmber of spliced to be rung, and the band can ring cambridge (for
I agree with you, Richard - that would clearly be daft. But, I don't
particularly care if someone wants to do that. It's their bag. (as long
as I'm not in the band!)
> Where is the limit on calls?
But why should there be a limit? Suppose I am ringing Snow Tiger (or
Newgate*). What is wrong with using 14 bobs, 1234 singles, and 18
"befores" so that you can get it down from 5280 without splitting the
tenors? (maybe the latter being motivated by the band).
* sorry Mark, I know you won't appreciate these 2 in the same sentence!
More information about the ringing-theory