Bob Jewett would you comment on this, for I know at one time you were on the rule committee for BCA.
At one time, actually during my playing era, the lowest numbered ball would spot if they were equal distance behind the line. This makes perfect sense in staying consistent and avoiding confusion, for in Rotation Games the lowest number ball always spots, and if two balls spot the lowest numbered ball spots first.
Someone with their infamous wisdom over the years that was in power to do so, changed it to highest ball spots, even though it makes absolutely no sense. Now as you stated some billiard authorities have players choice.
Next, it was highly debated that it use to be when spotting a ball it would be spotted frozen to all balls including the cue ball. I site my '68 BCA rule book, and this is of course how I played the games during my playing years, '69 - '73. I actually had to post a picture of the '68 BCA spotting rule to prove that the official bca rule was to spot the ball frozen to the cue ball.
Spotting the balls frozen to the cue ball, and I think you will agree, gives so many more options than leaving a gap! For a ball frozen to the cue ball allows the shooter to shoot through the object ball, whereas if there is a gap then of course you are susceptible to a double hit, and have few options. Thus actually penalizing the non-fouling incoming player, and supporting the player that committed the foul.
Jerry Matchin sited a match where Efren purposely fouled to spot a ball to block the cue ball, thus trapping the opponent, whereas if our historical decades old rule of spotting the ball frozen to the cue ball was in play then the opposing player could of escaped! Which I sited and this started the heated debate.
So once again over the years this decades upon decades old BCA rule was changed though someone's infamous reasoning who was in power. BCA changed presidents over the years like we change shirts.
Some thought it would be a foul to spot the object ball frozen to the cue ball because it is contacted, but it is not a foul in accordance to our OP.org spotting rules. But, back in those long gone days we officially played all ball fouls, which means if this was true then just spotting a ball frozen to an object ball would then also be a foul, which it is not, and thus would not be with the cue ball, for the spotting rule supersedes the 'all ball foul' rule.
So I of course support the adoption of our American historical way we use to spot balls, and of course this is the way OP was played in its historical beginning, which had its guidelines following the 14.1 & General BCA rules. It is also fairer to the incoming non-fouling opponent!
I would like to see commonsense prevail and have OP.org adopt this spotting rule. Dr. Bill agreed with me that it does make commonsense, and he also had issue with leaving a gap, for the gap is non specific as to how much gap, and could result in argument and judgement.
Your thoughts! thanks, Whitey
We are losing our historical American rules, and I can site more!
