Subject: Re: The uncrossed hotwater tour<br/>
Date: Apr 23, 2002 @ 18:17<br/>
Author: granthutchison (&quot;granthutchison&quot; &lt;granthutchison@...&gt;)<br/>
<a href="6337.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="6342.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic6331.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="6338.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="6340.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1775578486">Michael:<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt; &gt; What we can say, though, is that a *fully crossed* hotwater tour <br/>
&gt; &gt; is impossible <br/>
&gt; as well as unnecessary & irrelevant <br/>
 </span></blockquote>Fair enough. I raised the topic only because I&#39;d briefly entertained <br/>
the notion that an uncrossed tour *implied* the existence of a <br/>
crossed tour, too. You (general rather than specific &quot;you&quot;, in this <br/>
instance) could perhaps just cross each quadripoint and find yourself <br/>
reversing the line of march for alternating line segments - <br/>
effectively covering the same route but walking it in a different <br/>
order, and half the time in the opposite direction. But the formation <br/>
of little closed loops precluded that.<br/>
Shame. I was quite looking forward to presenting you with a crossed <br/>
tour.<br/>
<br/>
Grant</div>