Basil Jet wrote on 21 October 2010
04:49:47 ...
On 2010\10\20 18:47, Richard J. wrote:
Basil wrote on 20 October 2010
17:03:17 ...
On 2010\10\20 16:49, Graham Harrison wrote:

wrote in message
...

Gah! I just remembered Warren Street and Goodge Street.
I was *thinking* of Baker Street and Bond Street!
Back to the attic!

How about

Which is the only London Underground line which boasts two towns along
its' route where each town has precisely two stations? I believe the
answer is the Piccadilly with Ruislip/Ruislip Manor and Sudbury
Hill/Sudbury Town. The question may need tweaking to make it clearer. I
used the word "precisely" to eliminate the 3 Hounslows but I'm not sure
about use of "town".

There are several such station pairs on the District, namely Ealing,
Putney, Wimbledon, Dagenham, Upminster, Bow and conceivably Ham. Your
question doesn't specify that the line should have only a pair of pairs.

Putney doesn't count as Putney Bridge station isn't in Putney.

I knew someone would say that. His example makes it clear that he
considers a town to "have" a station if the town name is in the station
name.

Ah, so this alleged definition would have Liverpool as a city wich "has"
a station called Liverpool Street? Hmm.

After all, Sudbury has no clear boundaries,

Maybe, but it's sufficiently well recognised to appear on maps, and it
looks to me as if Sudbury Town and Sudbury Hill are both in Sudbury. In
the absence of defined boundaries, you ask someone who lives next door
to Sudbury Hill station if he lives in Sudbury.

and Eastcote is in the Ruislip postcode.

So what? It's not a "Ruislip" station under his definition.

If you can't begin to understand his question, ...

Talking to yourself again, Basil? :-)
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)