One pocket rules committee

I would like to suggest the formation of a one pocket rules committee. I don't know if one already exists or not; but if it does, it needs to address the jump cue situation before it gets out of hand. I'd like to nominate Art Tripp and Rob Melrose as prospective members.

petie said:

I would like to suggest the formation of a one pocket rules committee. I don't know if one already exists or not; but if it does, it needs to address the jump cue situation before it gets out of hand. I'd like to nominate Art Tripp and Rob Melrose as prospective members.

Click to expand...

Thanks Petie, there are alot more guys on here with more experience and knowledge than me that would be great on a committee. I personally believe jump cues are a joke and shouldn't be allowed in any game. Its not impressive to me to hit a ball with a sledge hammer and make it jump. There are APA 3's in our pool halls with jump cues.. LOL can't run 3 balls but can jump. I believe people should learn how to kick and use the diamonds. I have never seen efren use a jump cue and seems to have done alright

onepockethacker said:

Thanks Petie, there are alot more guys on here with more experience and knowledge than me that would be great on a committee. I personally believe jump cues are a joke and shouldn't be allowed in any game. Its not impressive to me to hit a ball with a sledge hammer and make it jump. There are APA 3's in our pool halls with jump cues.. LOL can't run 3 balls but can jump. I believe people should learn how to kick and use the diamonds. I have never seen efren use a jump cue and seems to have done alright

Click to expand...

Rob, I couldn't agree more that jump cues should be illegal in all pool games, and the art of kicking is being undermined by the air force.

Tom

The great Poochie, Harry Sexton, was once asked by an admirer if he would like a jump cue. Apparently, the admirer was willing to give one to Harry. He said, "What would I want a jump cue for?" He was one of the greatest 9 ball players on the planet and famously got perfect shape on almost every shot.

dont have a jump cue, dont need one--jump with your regular cue if you must, otherwise forget it--im kicking out of trouble, old school pool......

Poochie use to come to our pool hall in Madison Heights Mi back in the 60s, he was friends with the owner, Kirby. He could really play nine ball, don't know about the other games. Tom

Justin Cone had me in a trap with a ball in his hole and several other balls around his hole and all the kicking lanes were blocked. I jumped the stack hitting the ball perfect coming down, making it and stopped dead in the pocket. No, jump cues shouldn't be allowed for the very reason I just described. I could have just rolled up on a ball, but it would have just got worse. Jumping was a bad percentage shot but better than none. When I first started back playing, I played Jason who runs the Athens poolroom and we played over 25 hours playing 8 ahead sets and before this I had never even seen a jump cue. Well, I could see, I had better get one and learn how to use it, as it can mean as much as the 8 ball or more. He didn't just hit balls, he made a big percentage of them and got out. I have seen b players jump better than many pro's. All jump cues should be banned and I use them better than most.

The hell with jump cues. Ban below the ass pants.

Add me to the consensus here...If it was up to me, I'd ban jumping in all pool games...

- Ghost

fred bentivegna said:

That's the way I want to go out,Doc. A public execution for being too politically incorrect!

It must be somthing in the air there, because my old road partner, George Michaels, after living in Frisco for so long, has rolled over to the other side, the left one that is. I personally cant believe it.

Beard

Click to expand...

If you play cards long enough, you learn to deal.
Rod.
P.S. Cal is called granola, what aint fruits and nuts is flakes.

petie said:

I would like to suggest the formation of a one pocket rules committee. I don't know if one already exists or not; but if it does, it needs to address the jump cue situation before it gets out of hand. I'd like to nominate Art Tripp and Rob Melrose as prospective members.

Click to expand...

There is no official One Pocket rules committee, but no worries about jump cues -- our Offical rules already do not allow them:

5. Jumping

Players may use jump shots in One Pocket as long as they are performed with the player's own standard playing cue using legal jumping techniques as defined in General Rules. Specialized jump cues are not permitted in One Pocket.

Click to expand...

Quoted from our rules:
http://www.onepocket.org/one_pocket_pool_rules.htm

We last voted on our rules in 2005, and are indeed due for a review. We have talked about doing a review now and then. I don't think we have much disagreement about jumping though.

Things that seem to draw controversy though, include:

1. Whether an object ball flying off the table is considered a foul or not
2. How to word requirements of making a legal shot when balls are frozen
3. How to handle illegal pinching of an object ball to the pocket point or intentional double hit, etc
4. How to handle object balls being "accidentally" moved -- and whether or not moving one or more object balls is even considered a foul or not

Since we created our rules, they appear to have been adopted by all of the major tournament directors, either directly as we created them, or in some cases indirectly, as they "wrote" their own slight variations of our rules as their own, but consistent with most of the principles of ours. The BCA rules for One Pocket don't seem to have changed much, so they still remain woefully inadequate and out of touch -- the very reasons we created ours in the first place.

The CSI rules that the US Open One Pocket uses are very closely based on ours, but they have a couple of new ideas which are worth looking at adopting in ours. One relates to which ball to spot if all the balls are behind the line in a scratch situation, and another relates to the illegal pinching of object balls (and the like). The CSI rules are here: http://www.playbca.com/portals/0/rules/1Pocket.pdf

I too think jumping is kind of a joke, but I don't think that bringing up kicking is a good or valid way to argue the point. I think it should be argued against with other criteria. Table damage would be one. Do they let the cb leave the table in snooker? What are the arguments as to why not? There needs to be solid reasons why jumps should not be allowed, then I think we'll be getting somewhere.

NH Steve said:

We last voted on our rules in 2005, and are indeed due for a review. We have talked about doing a review now and then. I don't think we have much disagreement about jumping though.

Things that seem to draw controversy though, include:

1. Whether an object ball flying off the table is considered a foul or not
2. How to word requirements of making a legal shot when balls are frozen
3. How to handle illegal pinching of an object ball to the pocket point or intentional double hit, etc
4. How to handle object balls being "accidentally" moved -- and whether or not moving one or more object balls is even considered a foul or not

Since we created our rules, they appear to have been adopted by all of the major tournament directors, either directly as we created them, or in some cases indirectly, as they "wrote" their own slight variations of our rules as their own, but consistent with most of the principles of ours. The BCA rules for One Pocket don't seem to have changed much, so they still remain woefully inadequate and out of touch -- the very reasons we created ours in the first place.

The CSI rules that the US Open One Pocket uses are very closely based on ours, but they have a couple of new ideas which are worth looking at adopting in ours. One relates to which ball to spot if all the balls are behind the line in a scratch situation, and another relates to the illegal pinching of object balls (and the like). The CSI rules are here: http://www.playbca.com/portals/0/rules/1Pocket.pdf

Click to expand...

Steve,

I read the BCA rules ver batem and skimmed the rules on our website. I can see a few possible areas for work but I have one question at least for now. I have always played (because I was taught that way) that if you have bih in the kitchen, you could only shoot at balls that were ENTIRELY past yhe head string. In all other games you could shoot a ball if it was half over the line--in one pocket it has to be all the way over the line. Have you ever seen this played?

petie said:

Steve,

I read the BCA rules ver batem and skimmed the rules on our website. I can see a few possible areas for work but I have one question at least for now. I have always played (because I was taught that way) that if you have bih in the kitchen, you could only shoot at balls that were ENTIRELY past yhe head string. In all other games you could shoot a ball if it was half over the line--in one pocket it has to be all the way over the line. Have you ever seen this played?

Click to expand...

I found the DCC rules, and they call for a the whole ball being over the line: http://www.dcctickets.com/TheRules/tabid/61/Default.aspx

Our rules don't address the whole ball/center of the ball question. That means we left that issue to the "General Rules". If the consensus opinion is that for One Pocket, it should be "whole ball" I certainly have no problem with that.

PS would that apply both to the cue ball placement and the object ball?

NH Steve said:

I found the DCC rules, and they call for a the whole ball being over the line: http://www.dcctickets.com/TheRules/tabid/61/Default.aspx

Our rules don't address the whole ball/center of the ball question. That means we left that issue to the "General Rules". If the consensus opinion is that for One Pocket, it should be "whole ball" I certainly have no problem with that.

PS would that apply both to the cue ball placement and the object ball?

Click to expand...

This is of course not official but I have never attempted to place the cue ball close enough to the line that it would be partially over it. I would say yes it should apply to both.

NH Steve said:

We last voted on our rules in 2005, and are indeed due for a review. We have talked about doing a review now and then. I don't think we have much disagreement about jumping though.

Things that seem to draw controversy though, include:

1. Whether an object ball flying off the table is considered a foul or not
2. How to word requirements of making a legal shot when balls are frozen
3. How to handle illegal pinching of an object ball to the pocket point or intentional double hit, etc
4. How to handle object balls being "accidentally" moved -- and whether or not moving one or more object balls is even considered a foul or not

Since we created our rules, they appear to have been adopted by all of the major tournament directors, either directly as we created them, or in some cases indirectly, as they "wrote" their own slight variations of our rules as their own, but consistent with most of the principles of ours. The BCA rules for One Pocket don't seem to have changed much, so they still remain woefully inadequate and out of touch -- the very reasons we created ours in the first place.

The CSI rules that the US Open One Pocket uses are very closely based on ours, but they have a couple of new ideas which are worth looking at adopting in ours. One relates to which ball to spot if all the balls are behind the line in a scratch situation, and another relates to the illegal pinching of object balls (and the like). The CSI rules are here: http://www.playbca.com/portals/0/rules/1Pocket.pdf

Click to expand...

Here is a possible draft of the frozen ball issue:

When an object ball is frozen to a rail it may not be considered to be driven to that rail for purposes of fulfilling the minimum shot requirement. However, in order to invoke this rule or to call a foul by virtue of this rule, the frozen ball must be declared frozen before the shot is executed.

The Big Question

The Big Question

The biggest question to me is the whole issue of "cue ball fouls only" -- what to do about accidentally (or on purpose, lol) nudged object balls. The more I have thought about it the more I am in favor of a change in the direction of all ball fouls. I say in the direction of, because what I am thinking of would be a partial step, not going entirely to all ball fouls.

My main concern about all ball fouls is that because a controversial slight touch call could potentially be such a game changer, it would also invite some abuse -- i.e. major conflict. To me, the whole point of rules is to keep the games flowing competitively while avoiding conflict! That's why I would be opposed to 100% all ball fouls. But, by the same token, we have to admit that cue ball fouls only brings many questions and conflicts itself to our field of play.

That's why I have been thinking about a new rule, in between -- something like this:

Play shall be all ball fouls, with "One Touch Warning"

One Touch Warning Foul
If the shooting player accidentally contacts or moves one or more object balls prior to executing their shot, then a warning foul is called and the shooter must stop and wait for the opponent (or acting official or impartial observer) to restore the balls prior to continuing with their shot. If the shooting player disturbs balls during or after the shot, then there is no warning, and standard all ball foul rules apply.

If the warned player stopped prior to shooting and the balls have been restored, then they may proceed with their shot but under the observation of the acting official and the "all ball foul" rules apply for the continuation of their shot. The shooter may change their shot selection after a warning, but the warning still applies. A warning does not carry over to additional shots or innings.

If there is no official present, the opponent is responsible for calling over an impartial observer to monitor any close calls, whether a warning foul has been called or not. If there is no official or impartial observer present, then the benefit of the doubt on close calls goes to the shooter.

NH Steve said:

The biggest question to me is the whole issue of "cue ball fouls only" -- what to do about accidentally (or on purpose, lol) nudged object balls. The more I have thought about it the more I am in favor of a change in the direction of all ball fouls. I say in the direction of, because what I am thinking of would be a partial step, not going entirely to all ball fouls.

My main concern about all ball fouls is that because a controversial slight touch call could potentially be such a game changer, it would also invite some abuse -- i.e. major conflict. To me, the whole point of rules is to keep the games flowing competitively while avoiding conflict! That's why I would be opposed to 100% all ball fouls. But, by the same token, we have to admit that cue ball fouls only brings many questions and conflicts itself to our field of play.

That's why I have been thinking about a new rule, in between -- something like this:

Play shall be all ball fouls, with "One Touch Warning"

One Touch Warning Foul
If the shooting player accidentally contacts or moves one or more object balls prior to executing their shot, then a warning foul is called and the shooter must stop and wait for the opponent (or acting official or impartial observer) to restore the balls prior to continuing with their shot. If the shooting player disturbs balls during or after the shot, then there is no warning, and standard all ball foul rules apply.

If the warned player stopped prior to shooting and the balls have been restored, then they may proceed with their shot but under the observation of the acting official and the "all ball foul" rules apply for the continuation of their shot. The shooter may change their shot selection after a warning, but the warning still applies. A warning does not carry over to additional shots or innings.

If there is no official present, the opponent is responsible for calling over an impartial observer to monitor any close calls, whether a warning foul has been called or not. If there is no official or impartial observer present, then the benefit of the doubt on close calls goes to the shooter.

Click to expand...

I think this is good and bridges the gap between nitty and proper. Old farts like me and most of the guys I play with are continually fouling object ball. This would give everyone a fair way out.

On another matter, in the DCC rules it states:
"Trapping or Wedging the Cue Ball: It is a foul if you deliberately trap or wedge the cue ball in the jaw of the pocket. In addition to the foul penalty, your opponent receives cue ball in hand behind the head string."
My comment: This should not be limited to the jaw of the pocket. I can see this being done along the rail and being almost as devastating to the opponent.

Also,
"Deliberate Cue Ball Foul: If you wish to take a deliberate cue ball foul, you must use your cue tip to strike the cue ball. If you strike the cue ball with anything other than the cue tip, in addition to the foul penalty, your opponent receives cue ball in hand behind the head string."
My comment: In this case and in the case of trapping the cue ball in the jaws, I think the ball in hand in the kitchen should not be mandatory. I can see where you are having a safety battle in the middle of the foot rail with one ball on the foot rail and 2 balls on the spot already. You may not like shooting from the kitchen as much as just shooting from the foot rail. I don't know.

What is the advantage of moving the OB's ? They will be put back to the detriment of the shooter. I've never seen this done except by accident, and it never favored the shooter. When you moved them, you'll have to agree with where ever they are replaced.
Rod.
P.S. Some act like it's done on purpose, which is inane.
Of course if the shooter makes a ball you certainly get to punish him with this foul rule, even if it was an accident.