Steve, at least on this thread I am unable to find Jay's statement; "it's hard enough anyway, why add such a major hurdle?" Must have been made somewhere else. But a few are siding with this view vs. playing the scratch unforgiving way. No one has ventured to speak up in support of my view.
***Forgiving the scratch on the break is ok, but of course with most rules it does get abused and thus changes the intent of the game, when players intentionally scratch.***
I have two reputable members, Billy Jackets & Androd, that state the game was played with a scratch at anytime ends the rack. It only proves that I am not going totally off my rocker. I for one really appreciate their input, as you do of course.
You have my guidance input, the decision as to which should be the standard, is yours of course. I am really ok either way.
Whitey
Sorry I was so late with my reply, I just never read this thread for some reason.
Scratch ended the frame every time I played it.
If I remember correctly Nick Varner had a practice version of this, and in that, you got ball in hand after the break , behind the line, but I never saw anyone gamble that way, just practice, {because it brings the ball count up for weaker players.}
I was never witness to the challenge at DCC so I will accept Steves explanation of how they played it there.
My suggestion was actually that the rules be simplified given it is essentially a "Ghost" game first and foremost, that is sometimes utilized in a gambling setting and sometimes utilized in a multiplayer challenge "tournament". In that regard I do not see the need to nitpick things like whether the cue ball is wholly behind the line or the base of the ball is behind the line within the "rules" -- leave the nitpicking to others lol.
The more little rules you put in this, the more technicalities you offer to a side bettor to bring up if the slightest thing that happens during the shooters 5 racks with money involved, if you ask me. The less rules the better. Let the shooter shoot and tally up the balls to determine a win or not — otherwise you’ll get sudden timely claims in the 5th rack — “you fouled, game over”.
I also see no need to consider a scratch or foul on the break as nullifying that rack attempt. The whole point of the "game" is to see how many balls you can run per rack; why would you want to cut off an entire rack before it even begins? If you don't want to give BIH on a breaking scratch, then make the player re-break, with a penalty of -1 applied. Likewise if you don't contact the rack at all -- so what? Just do a re-break and if you want, penalize -1. Again, the point is simply to see how many balls you can cumulatively run in 5 racks.
Where did the idea of a scratch on the break nullifying the entire rack come from? My own experience is limited to the last dozen years or so (since I was involved every year they had this challenge at DCC). But it does in some form date back to Johnston City according to what I have heard from older players. I never heard of a scratch on the break nullifying the rack.
I never meant my post to be a cause of contention , just stating how we gambled at it.
We are talking about 2 different animals though, right from the start.
The DCC venue was for great players to take a 50 dollar pop at a prize fund. It was meant to be another spectacle for the fans and showcase abilities, of course they want someone to shoot 75 . So you make it favorable for the shooter
When I was gambling ,my focus was the exact opposite. I did not cheat anyone, but I made sure everyone knew the rules and followed them.
Side bettors were never welcome in my action.
I never dumped , so they were absolutely useless, as far as I was concerned.
I never really cared what rules we played by, as long as everyone was playing by the same ones.
My gambling experiences are much different than yours, whenever the rules were"loose" there was no end to the tries at manipulating them.
When the rules were written in stone , there was not much to argue about.
I would have no problem with scratches on break minus 1 , or even scratches don't count, I would just adjust the score they had to go to accordingly.
You don't understand why anyone would think a scratch on the break should end the rack, and I can't understand why such a big mistake and possible advantage should not have a big penalty. {Unless you are just having fun!}
Just different ways of viewing the same situation, neither is wrong or right in my view, just pick the one you like for the circumstances.