What's the call here?

[lll]

What you said was move two balls is loss of game, well I have played it's just a foul, not loss of game. Raking the balls is loss of game.

What happened to the OP is a bunch of balls moved. The normal rules are cue ball fouls only. The QB moved several balls so I would say that was a foul and he now owes two balls and play from there

I see your point and you could be right about 2 balls being a foul not loss of game..
I stand corrected,,,.
if anyone can find that rule it would be helpfull

 

[gulfportdoc]

Here are 3 applicable rules from the 3 common rule sets: OnePocket.org, WPA, and DCC. In our rules, the issue of accidentally moving only one object ball, in contrast to more than one, is not spelled out to a "T". However the reference to "disturbed balls" seems to imply that it is not a foul simply to move more than one object ball. The distinction seems to be whether or not the balls can be restored, or at least restored satisfactorily. If not, it is a foul.

The WPA seems to be saying that unintentionally moving only one object ball is not a foul, unless it changes the outcome of the shot; but that moving two or more is.

And the DCC is very specific that moving more than one OB is a foul. Moving only one is not a foul unless it changes the outcome of the shot in progress.

My personal preference is our own rules: the unofficial expert body of one-pocket. For example, if I'm playing a guy in a private match, and he accidentally bumps two OBs, I would just put them back where they were, and allow him to continue on.

But in the case of the original posted scenario, the balls would not have been likely able to be restored, so it would at minimum result in a loss of game to the offender. ~Doc

onepocket.org RULE: 6.1 Unless otherwise announced by the tournament director, One Pocket is played according to the World General Rules 1.16.1 [defunct], ‘cue ball fouls only’. In the event that a player accidentally moves a ball, the opponent may elect to have the disturbed ball remain in its new position or be restored to its original position. When balls are restored, they shall be placed as close as possible to their original positions, with no advantage to be gained by the offending player. If no official is available to restore disturbed balls, then the players must come to agreement on satisfactory replacement of the disturbed balls prior to continuing play.

WPA RULE: 20. Cue ball fouls only
If there is no referee presiding over a match, it may be played using cue ball fouls only. That is, touching or moving any ball other than the cue ball would not be a foul unless it changes the outcome of the shot by either touching another ball or having any ball, including the cue ball, going through the area originally occupied by the moved ball. If this does not happen, then the opposing player must be given the option of either leaving the ball where it lies or replacing the ball as near as possible to its original position to the agreement of both players. If a player shoots without giving his opponent the option to replace, it will be a foul resulting in cue ball in hand for the opponent.

DCC RULE: Cue Ball Fouls Only: Accidentally touching or disturbing a single object ball is not a foul unless the disturbed ball has an effect on the outcome of the shot. See a referee for advice if you think this has happened. Otherwise, the opponent has the option to restore the disturbed ball or leave it in position. If the offending player attempts to restore the disturbed ball without giving their opponent the restoration option, it is a foul.

 

[LSJohn]

None of the three specifically state that moving more than one is a foul, but I think you have misinterpreted the (unfortunate) "balls" in the 1P.org rule. It should read "a ball" and I'm confident that this was the intended meaning. (In the first use of "balls" the writer was probably thinking about single balls moved in multiple matches.)

The three read differently, but IMO all mean the same thing (except BCA says "if no referee is present."):

If one ball is inadvertently moved, and that ball does not change the outcome of the shot, it is not a foul; the non-offending player has the option of leaving it in its new position or replacing it as close as possible to its original position. In all circumstances where more than one ball is inadvertently moved, it is a foul. If more than one ball is intentionally moved, it is loss of game or, at the discretion of the referee, loss of match.

 

[lll]

Here are 3 applicable rules from the 3 common rule sets: OnePocket.org, WPA, and DCC. In our rules, the issue of accidentally moving only one object ball, in contrast to more than one, is not spelled out to a "T". However the reference to "disturbed balls" seems to imply that it is not a foul simply to move more than one object ball. The distinction seems to be whether or not the balls can be restored, or at least restored satisfactorily. If not, it is a foul.

The WPA seems to be saying that unintentionally moving only one object ball is not a foul, unless it changes the outcome of the shot; but that moving two or more is.

And the DCC is very specific that moving more than one OB is a foul. Moving only one is not a foul unless it changes the outcome of the shot in progress.

My personal preference is our own rules: the unofficial expert body of one-pocket. For example, if I'm playing a guy in a private match, and he accidentally bumps two OBs, I would just put them back where they were, and allow him to continue on.

But in the case of the original posted scenario, the balls would not have been likely able to be restored, so it would at minimum result in a loss of game to the offender. ~Doc

onepocket.org RULE: 6.1 Unless otherwise announced by the tournament director, One Pocket is played according to the World General Rules 1.16.1 [defunct], ‘cue ball fouls only’. In the event that a player accidentally moves a ball, the opponent may elect to have the disturbed ball remain in its new position or be restored to its original position. When balls are restored, they shall be placed as close as possible to their original positions, with no advantage to be gained by the offending player. If no official is available to restore disturbed balls, then the players must come to agreement on satisfactory replacement of the disturbed balls prior to continuing play.

WPA RULE: 20. Cue ball fouls only
If there is no referee presiding over a match, it may be played using cue ball fouls only. That is, touching or moving any ball other than the cue ball would not be a foul unless it changes the outcome of the shot by either touching another ball or having any ball, including the cue ball, going through the area originally occupied by the moved ball. If this does not happen, then the opposing player must be given the option of either leaving the ball where it lies or replacing the ball as near as possible to its original position to the agreement of both players. If a player shoots without giving his opponent the option to replace, it will be a foul resulting in cue ball in hand for the opponent.

DCC RULE: Cue Ball Fouls Only: Accidentally touching or disturbing a single object ball is not a foul unless the disturbed ball has an effect on the outcome of the shot. See a referee for advice if you think this has happened. Otherwise, the opponent has the option to restore the disturbed ball or leave it in position. If the offending player attempts to restore the disturbed ball without giving their opponent the restoration option, it is a foul.

doc thanks fpr taking the time to look up the rules and post them
however
the part i bolded where in the rules does it say loss of game for irreplaceable multiple balls???

 

[LSJohn]

doc thanks fpr taking the time to look up the rules and post them
however
the part i bolded where in the rules does it say loss of game for irreplaceable multiple balls???

The loss of game for moving irreplaceable multiples refers to intentionally doing so and the rationale is unsportsmanlike conduct. When it is clearly inadvertent, I haven't seen a rule.

In the case that started this thread it was inadvertent, but I'd say unsportsmanlike conduct applied as well. If it occurred in a tournament I think it should be loss of game.

 

[wincardona]

The loss of game for moving irreplaceable multiples refers to intentionally doing so and the rationale is unsportsmanlike conduct. When it is clearly inadvertent, I haven't seen a rule.

In the case that started this thread it was inadvertent, but I'd say unsportsmanlike conduct applied as well. If it occurred in a tournament I think it should be loss of game.

In my initial post I thought that the player that committed the offense broke the balls and I ruled as that was the case. I also took into consideration that the match was between two players that had a history of gambling against one another and didn't feel that the correct technical call would of been appropriate..loss of game. The offending player exhibited an unsportsmanlike posture which would then be a loss of game because he moved multiple balls that couldn't be replaced, however, like before, loss of game in this type of a scenario is too much to charge a player that you have a good gambling relationship with, but you can set a precedent by explaining that ..unsportsmanlike conduct should be viewed as a loss of game when multiple balls are moved that cannot be replaced, and in the future the loss of game ruling will be enforced if applicable.

The key here is the "unsportsmanlike behavior" that was exhibited, with that understanding it is an easy call..loss of game. If for whatever reason you don't enforce the rule in this type of a scenario, it should be understood that in the future the loss of game ruling will be enforced if the offense is "unsportsmanlike behavior" That's not too much to ask, even if it is between players that are familiar with one another when gambling.


Dr. Bill

 

[androd]

The OP did say it was an accident. sorta

 

[tylerdurden]

If a guy is bridging over the stack and his hand slips or something and he inadvertently moves every ball in the stack, he doesn't loose the game?

I always find myself at odds with our rules. You know in the Philippines you go anywhere in any game, you touch a single ball it's a foul. I think we are too passive with our rules. It is ok to strongly penalize a player for moving every ball (or a ball) on the table, even if it is an accident. Accidents los games all the time.

People lose games after they make good shots. People lose games after bad shots, and after fouls too. I don't think we should have a problem at all with a player losing a game on such a huge blunder as moving multiple balls.

 

[keoneyo]

If a guy is bridging over the stack and his hand slips or something and he inadvertently moves every ball in the stack, he doesn't loose the game?

I always find myself at odds with our rules. You know in the Philippines you go anywhere in any game, you touch a single ball it's a foul. I think we are too passive with our rules. It is ok to strongly penalize a player for moving every ball (or a ball) on the table, even if it is an accident. Accidents los games all the time.

People lose games after they make good shots. People lose games after bad shots, and after fouls too. I don't think we should have a problem at all with a player losing a game on such a huge blunder as moving multiple balls.

That's the way old purists of straight pool played the game. You touch a ball and its a foul I saw Nick Varner play that way with another pro from Texas. It was a beautiful game. Very conscious of everything on the table. Called foul on themselves when they brushed a ball with their sleeves.
I believe that's how snooker is played in the UK.

 

[petie]

Several years ago I had two friends (full stop!) No, I had these two friends who both played me but never each other. So I instigated a game between them where I was backing one of them even though I was friends with both. The one I was backing , Jim Daugherty aka Side Spin, had the shorts and wouldn't play on OZs. So it was dinner time and I always go home for dinner so I give my guy the stakes money and tell him to do his best and settle up with me tomorrow.

Now according to both players, the owner of Earl's Place pool hall, and all the patrons this is what happened in the first game. My guy was shooting and needed a couple which were hangers. Just as he is about to pull the trigger, the owner(Earl Schultz) makes an impossible golf shot on the adjacent 12 foot snooker table and in his exuberance backed into Jim's cue and causes him to push the cue forward spreading balls all over the table. They didn't know what to do so they just shut down.

My other friend, Nick Nickerson, decided to ask Onepocket.org for advice on how to rule this. He is not known for proper use of the written language but that is another story. Among the answers he got was one from Grady Mathews. He said put all the balls back as close as you can and shoot again. No kidding. I noticed that Rod eluded to doing this earlier in this thread. I think it is right in all but tournament and high stakes matches.

 

[androd]

Well, I may not know the rules but I've never had anyone quit playing me over some situation where one was in question.
Touching balls (any number) CB rolling across some arbitrary path, 3 fouls or any other nonsense, I just go with whatever they think, most are fair.

 

[LSJohn]

Among the answers he got was one from Grady Mathews. He said put all the balls back as close as you can and shoot again. No kidding. I noticed that Rod eluded to doing this earlier in this thread. I think it is right in all but tournament and high stakes matches.

One thing this thread should show us is that it would be a good idea to bring this up and get an agreement before we start any match with serious consequences.

 

[androd]

One thing this thread should show us is that it would be a good idea to bring this up and get an agreement before we start any match with serious consequences.

Especially with a bunch of antique, shaky, jumpy, nervous old settlers.

 

[gulfportdoc]

I've participated in many dozens of rules threads since 1p.o started up in --I think-- 2004. They usually start out something like, "What is the rule when X happens?" What follows is typically a wide assortment of opinions. Then someone posts the pertinent rule(s).

It kind of tickles me that several posters quickly chime in, oftentimes defensively, to write something like, "Well, I don't play that way!" Or, "Well, WE used to play X way." And, "I don't think it's right that X."

The rules are mainly there to be followed in tournaments by certain venues that have announced which rules are to be in effect. In fact there are usually players' meetings which most often cover most rules to be used, sometimes ad nauseam.

HOWEVER........In private matches, the opponents are obviously free to use whatever rules to which they agree. There's no reason to defend these rules. They are freely agreed to by the parties.

It's been written a hundred times that guys should discuss and agree on the particular rules which they will be using before they start their session. But in actual practice, this is very seldom done.

So when a rule situation comes up, it becomes more of a negotiation rather than an actual rules citation. The guy who shouts the loudest, or enlists the most convincing help (sometimes printed rules), usually wins. At that point the game often continues from there, or one guy unscrews.

So in private matches the ability (but not the obligation) to use rule sets is there, and once in awhile it actually works.....

~Doc

 

[lll]

I've participated in many dozens of rules threads since 1p.o started up in --I think-- 2004. They usually start out something like, "What is the rule when X happens?" What follows is typically a wide assortment of opinions. Then someone posts the pertinent rule(s).

It kind of tickles me that several posters quickly chime in, oftentimes defensively, to write something like, "Well, I don't play that way!" Or, "Well, WE used to play X way." And, "I don't think it's right that X."

The rules are mainly there to be followed in tournaments by certain venues that have announced which rules are to be in effect. In fact there are usually players' meetings which most often cover most rules to be used, sometimes ad nauseam.

HOWEVER........In private matches, the opponents are obviously free to use whatever rules to which they agree. There's no reason to defend these rules. They are freely agreed to by the parties.

It's been written a hundred times that guys should discuss and agree on the particular rules which they will be using before they start their session. But in actual practice, this is very seldom done.

So when a rule situation comes up, it becomes more of a negotiation rather than an actual rules citation. The guy who shouts the loudest, or enlists the most convincing help (sometimes printed rules), usually wins. At that point the game often continues from there, or one guy unscrews.

So in private matches the ability (but not the obligation) to use rule sets is there, and once in awhile it actually works.....

~Doc

doc
i think we all agree
in gambling whats agreed to between 2 consenting adults is allowed...
but its good to know what the "official " ruling is...

 

[tylerdurden]

I've participated in many dozens of rules threads since 1p.o started up in --I think-- 2004. They usually start out something like, "What is the rule when X happens?" What follows is typically a wide assortment of opinions. Then someone posts the pertinent rule(s).

It kind of tickles me that several posters quickly chime in, oftentimes defensively, to write something like, "Well, I don't play that way!" Or, "Well, WE used to play X way." And, "I don't think it's right that X."

The rules are mainly there to be followed in tournaments by certain venues that have announced which rules are to be in effect. In fact there are usually players' meetings which most often cover most rules to be used, sometimes ad nauseam.

HOWEVER........In private matches, the opponents are obviously free to use whatever rules to which they agree. There's no reason to defend these rules. They are freely agreed to by the parties.

It's been written a hundred times that guys should discuss and agree on the particular rules which they will be using before they start their session. But in actual practice, this is very seldom done.

So when a rule situation comes up, it becomes more of a negotiation rather than an actual rules citation. The guy who shouts the loudest, or enlists the most convincing help (sometimes printed rules), usually wins. At that point the game often continues from there, or one guy unscrews.

So in private matches the ability (but not the obligation) to use rule sets is there, and once in awhile it actually works.....

~Doc

If there were a set of good solid rules, everyone could just follow those though and nobody would have to bother.

What do golfers do, or tennis players? Do they have to go over every little rule prior to teeing off for a money match? I would guess they just say tournament rules, which brings the advantages that everyone knows them and they are set in stone. If u want to change one or two for the match, no problem. I don't know guys I just see this as a never ending cycle of not getting anywhere. The first thing we need to do is admit the rules are not up to par, but we are a long way from getting there.

 

[koldcash]

I've participated in many dozens of rules threads since 1p.o started up in --I think-- 2004. They usually start out something like, "What is the rule when X happens?" What follows is typically a wide assortment of opinions. Then someone posts the pertinent rule(s).

It kind of tickles me that several posters quickly chime in, oftentimes defensively, to write something like, "Well, I don't play that way!" Or, "Well, WE used to play X way." And, "I don't think it's right that X."

The rules are mainly there to be followed in tournaments by certain venues that have announced which rules are to be in effect. In fact there are usually players' meetings which most often cover most rules to be used, sometimes ad nauseam.

HOWEVER........In private matches, the opponents are obviously free to use whatever rules to which they agree. There's no reason to defend these rules. They are freely agreed to by the parties.

It's been written a hundred times that guys should discuss and agree on the particular rules which they will be using before they start their session. But in actual practice, this is very seldom done.

So when a rule situation comes up, it becomes more of a negotiation rather than an actual rules citation. The guy who shouts the loudest, or enlists the most convincing help (sometimes printed rules), usually wins. At that point the game often continues from there, or one guy unscrews.

So in private matches the ability (but not the obligation) to use rule sets is there, and once in awhile it actually works.....

~Doc

Yeah I have a habit of just saying 3 foul rule and any part touching for the heads string and that's it......been a very interesting read and I really appreciate everyone's input.

 

[tylerdurden]

What is clearer, has less ambiguity, punishes the offender and is going to encourage players to better control their bridge and cue?

onepocket.org RULE: 6.1 Unless otherwise announced by the tournament director, One Pocket is played according to the World General Rules 1.16.1 [defunct], ‘cue ball fouls only’. In the event that a player accidentally moves a ball, the opponent may elect to have the disturbed ball remain in its new position or be restored to its original position. When balls are restored, they shall be placed as close as possible to their original positions, with no advantage to be gained by the offending player. If no official is available to restore disturbed balls, then the players must come to agreement on satisfactory replacement of the disturbed balls prior to continuing play.

WPA RULE: 20. Cue ball fouls only
If there is no referee presiding over a match, it may be played using cue ball fouls only. That is, touching or moving any ball other than the cue ball would not be a foul unless it changes the outcome of the shot by either touching another ball or having any ball, including the cue ball, going through the area originally occupied by the moved ball. If this does not happen, then the opposing player must be given the option of either leaving the ball where it lies or replacing the ball as near as possible to its original position to the agreement of both players. If a player shoots without giving his opponent the option to replace, it will be a foul resulting in cue ball in hand for the opponent.

DCC RULE: Cue Ball Fouls Only: Accidentally touching or disturbing a single object ball is not a foul unless the disturbed ball has an effect on the outcome of the shot. See a referee for advice if you think this has happened. Otherwise, the opponent has the option to restore the disturbed ball or leave it in position. If the offending player attempts to restore the disturbed ball without giving their opponent the restoration option, it is a foul.

Or....
If you move two or more object balls in a game of one pocket and the balls can't reasonably be put back to where they were (such as the stack being disturbed), it is loss of game. If a single ball is touched it us treated as a foul.

That first rule is hideously flawed. "Must come to an agreement". Ok, thanks. What if they can't agree?

Keep in mind, rules don't always have to be perfectly just. They just have to be, ideally, consistent and promote professional play in my estimation. Why are we so scared of a game ending anyway? You can just flip the coin again and start another.

 

[Jeff sparks]

Ok I'm playing a guy some 50 a game in cape coral a while back and he scratches in the pocket, he's stuck a little and steaming and grabs the cue ball the throw it up table to me, it "comes out his hand" early and he throws the cue ball right into the stack about 6 or 7 balls move ( I just broke). Whats the call?
2 other variables, 1 he's very accident prone while steaming/losing( put a 12 inch rip in a cloth one time against me when he miscued and tried to shoot the ball off table, 2 we have been buddies for like 20 years not tight, but you know go out and eat, get drunk a few times at the bars. whats the official call and wwyd would be nice.
I tried to call loss of game, but gave up on it and just went with the scratch....[/

Nothing official here, but it's probably what I'd do, including the last sentence!!

If you have been gambling with someone for quite sometime, you should know that persons tendencies and have basically accepted them, simply because you are still gambling with them. Chances are, you either have a good game with this person, or you enjoy the competition.

In this instance, he obviously made a careless mistake caused by tilting out briefly, and IMO it should be punished, not rewarded with a negotiation.

Say nothing, just act normal, study your options and let him stew over his carelessness.

Just leave em where they stopped ( he moved em) and shoot from the kitchen. He owes one for the scratch and play continues. I wouldn't offer repositioning or anything else. He's got no complaint coming, and it's tonic for his temperament. He might actually learn something from it this way, at the very least, he will think twice before he does it again!

Unless of course, you miss from the kitchen, sell out, and lose the game!!
Then of course you'll have to deal with your tilt factor!!!! Lol

 

[gulfportdoc]

If there were a set of good solid rules, everyone could just follow those though and nobody would have to bother.

What do golfers do, or tennis players? Do they have to go over every little rule prior to teeing off for a money match? I would guess they just say tournament rules, which brings the advantages that everyone knows them and they are set in stone. If u want to change one or two for the match, no problem. I don't know guys I just see this as a never ending cycle of not getting anywhere. The first thing we need to do is admit the rules are not up to par, but we are a long way from getting there.

The reason that there is not a standard set of rules is that there is no governing body in pocket billiards. Ever since the BCA more or less stepped away from pool, it's been a free-for-all.

Golf has the USGA, which standardizes and enforces rules in tournament and handicap play in the United States. I assume there's a similar organization in tennis and, undoubtedly, in bowling.

So various entities, e.g. the DCC, WPA, the various leagues, and others simply establish rules for their purposes. It turns out that the rules for the big events are pretty much the same, with a few specific differences.

Will there ever be a governing body in pool? It's very unlikely. And if one were to develop, it's life span would probably not be long.

There are several reasons for that. First, the typical good pool player is not the type of guy who stands to be governed. Many of us are too individualistic, and we distrust authority. Second, most people do not take pool seriously. They want to shoot a few racks and have a coupla brewskies. Compare the number of serious golfers in comparison to the entire body of golfers, and it seems to me there is a much higher percentage of them than there are those serious pool players in relation to all pool players.

Everyone knows that there is no money in pool, outside of toward the recreational player. So until there is some financial incentive, pool will not formalize, and therefore will not develop a praiseworthy set of rules.

~Doc