View Single Post
  #5  
Old 01-09-2019, 01:26 PM
darmoose darmoose is offline
Verified Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 1,315
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis "Whitey" Young View Post
Darmoose, to be clear, your rule suggestion is after 'any foul' and not isolated to just intentionally trapping/wedging the balls. Right? Whitey
Whitey,

I know you pay attention to rules discussions and have valuable thoughts to offer.The answer to your specific question is "yes", it applies to ALL fouls, no exceptions (that is the best kind of rule, no exceptions). Consider what I explained in the other thread as to the problems this will solve, and consider that the pool world already uses this rule in the case of nine ball when we allow a "pushout" and give the opponent the option of shooting or giving the table back to the opponent. And, yes, I know that in this case the pushout was not a foul.

There is no good reason why a player should be allowed to commit a foul, intentionally or otherwise, and it penalizes his opponent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lll View Post
darrell
i appreciate your time and effort considering rule changes and ways to make tournaments play faster
and you do have valid points to your point of view
but i dont think the small number of regular posters and an aggressive presenter should rock the world of one pocket and change the official onepocket.org rules
jmho
icbw
Larry,

Appreciate your considerations re rules also. And, as I am sure you agree, all sports/games are, and always have been, subject to rules changes.

This particular rule change, whatever it stems from has merit and should be considered as part of what this One Pocket.org has a mandate to do, write the official rules we play by.

This idea is already used in some other games, albeit in limited situations, but it is not a completely new or unheard of idea that we've never heard of or used. I don't see how it necessarily "rocks our world". It only has any effect on accidental fouls in that the opponent has an option to shoot or return the table. If he has a shot, he's gonna shoot, if not, the fouling player gets to shoot again which could very well end up being advantageous to him depending on what he does.

In the case of an intentional foul this new rule keeps a player who got legitimately trapped from being rewarded by forcing his opponent to also foul, thereby, eliminating most of the penalty for getting trapped. It also gives the player who created the trap his full reward for doing so. I cannot imagine anyone, given an opportunity to get rid of the intentional foul rule we use today, which is unfair and has a much bigger impact on the game than what I am proposing, not wanting to get rid of it.

Just my guess, but I think the way we play intentional fouls today, where each player commits two fouls before the original fouler is forced to make a legitimate shot is simply the result of the "three foul rule" which is being misused and was not the intent of that rule.

And, you are right, this new rule would also speed up the game.

__________________
The early bird may get the worm...but the second mouse gets the cheese...Shutin@urholeisOVERATED.
Reply With Quote