Dennis "Whitey" Young
Verified Member
In '68 One Pocket was the last pool game recognized out of 16 games, and was not a recognized game by BCA until '67. The entire written game rule is a mere 3/4 of a page. One Pocket being the unique game that it is, also has a unique lag rule, for there is also a pocket selection to be determined!
This is a caption from the '68 BCA One Pocket Game Rule, and pertaining to the lag:
'Option of break is determined by lag or lot, and prior to the opening shot one pocket at the foot of the table is selected by the winner of the lag as the pocket he will use, the other person or side will then use only the other pocket at the foot of the table'.
There is two parts to this statement: 1st. the winner of the lag has the option to break or relinquish it. 2nd. the winner of the lag also gets to choose which pocket they want for their scoring pocket.
Thereby, this is my take on this, and lets say the winner of the lag has chosen to have their opponent break! But with this, the breaking opponent does not have the right to choose their scoring pocket, for by rule the 'winner of the lag' maintains this right, and chooses their own preference scoring pocket.
A head twister, but makes perfect sense!
In a Jay Helfert commentating he stated; " the winner of the lag has the option to break, but you know, I have never seen the winner of the lag give the break to their opponent".
A little bit of history trivia to change the pace, and to maul over! Is the writing flawed, or is the intent as written, or is the rule just overlooked, or is it just another by-gone rule long forgot?
Back in the day I never had a rule book, just learned the rules by playing. And the intent of this rule may never have made it to the hustler world! Whitey
This is a caption from the '68 BCA One Pocket Game Rule, and pertaining to the lag:
'Option of break is determined by lag or lot, and prior to the opening shot one pocket at the foot of the table is selected by the winner of the lag as the pocket he will use, the other person or side will then use only the other pocket at the foot of the table'.
There is two parts to this statement: 1st. the winner of the lag has the option to break or relinquish it. 2nd. the winner of the lag also gets to choose which pocket they want for their scoring pocket.
Thereby, this is my take on this, and lets say the winner of the lag has chosen to have their opponent break! But with this, the breaking opponent does not have the right to choose their scoring pocket, for by rule the 'winner of the lag' maintains this right, and chooses their own preference scoring pocket.
A head twister, but makes perfect sense!
In a Jay Helfert commentating he stated; " the winner of the lag has the option to break, but you know, I have never seen the winner of the lag give the break to their opponent".
A little bit of history trivia to change the pace, and to maul over! Is the writing flawed, or is the intent as written, or is the rule just overlooked, or is it just another by-gone rule long forgot?
Back in the day I never had a rule book, just learned the rules by playing. And the intent of this rule may never have made it to the hustler world! Whitey