3 day rule discussion/moving on!

[Island Drive]

Just because it is legal to shoot through an object ball that is frozen to the cue ball, does not clear the way for an illegal double hit or push caused by secondary object balls that are in "close proximity". I think that is what you are referring to as a "shovel shot", correct? That would be considered a foul because the push/double hit that is caused by the secondary "close proximity" balls.

Yes, if this situation arises....non shooting player, has an obligation to ask their opponent, ''before opponent pulls the trigger''?....are you shooting away? or into the cluster? If they are going into the cluster, call a ref.

 

[levartze]

Yes, if this situation arises....non shooting player, has an obligation to ask their opponent, ''before opponent pulls the trigger''?....are you shooting away? or into the cluster? If they are going into the cluster, call a ref.

And typically, if he doesn’t say anything and complains after the fact, the ref usually goes with the shooter.

 

[NH Steve]

Right, but Darrell wasn't suggesting that the players confer and agree; he was suggesting that there's a way to define what the acceptable angle is and that people will be able to see that it's a reasonable definition.

How about: When the cue is lined up for the intended shot, if it is aimed to entirely miss the object ball if the CB were removed, the angle of aim is acceptable. ? (I think this results in slightly less than a half-ball hit; less only because of the thickness of the shaft/ferrule/tip.)

This is a lot like the jack up 45 degree rule -- it doesn't actually mean that a double hit would be avoided by doing it -- but it at least shows the idea of an effort. In fact if you are talking "more than a half ball hit" then you are also up around 45 degrees. In that case it could be written either 45 degrees elevation or shooting away 45 degrees. I have a feeling both Bob and Dennis would strongly disagree though, because their technical knowledge is telling them a double hit is still very possible even if you are jacked up or angled at 45 degrees, and also with proper technique it is very possible to avoid a double hit at a much more direct angle or more level stroke. Nothing is perfect. My own impression is that shooting away at an angle is a better fudgy way of avoiding a double hit than jacking up is. Jacking up to draw in close proximity for most of us still often produces that sudden lurch of a short distance forward into the object ball that is the indicator for a double hit -- even if jacked up 45 degrees.

 

[darmoose]

Right, but Darrell wasn't suggesting that the players confer and agree; he was suggesting that there's a way to define what the acceptable angle is and that people will be able to see that it's a reasonable definition.

How about: When the cue is lined up for the intended shot, if it is aimed to entirely miss the object ball if the CB were removed, the angle of aim is acceptable. ? (I think this results in slightly less than a half-ball hit; less only because of the thickness of the shaft/ferrule/tip.)

Yes, that's it exactly. And if a player is not willing to shoot "away", he must subject his execution of his shot to an objective 3rd party, or he must live with the opponents call.

Honestly, I think if the players agree that a shot is an angle safe enough to avoid the double hit, then that's all that matters in that case, that the players agree

Steve,

You are correct, and this rule would allow players to PREDETERMINE that a shot will not be a foul. But, in the alternative, if the shooter wishes to shoot more directly towards the OB, he must get an objective 3rd party to make the call or it is the opponent who makes the call with NO argument.

I think this should be the rule, which accommodates all players and all levels of skill. Too many players of less than expert skill think they can execute this shot without fouling, and then want to argue the point when a foul is called on them.

 

[darmoose]

This is a lot like the jack up 45 degree rule -- it doesn't actually mean that a double hit would be avoided by doing it -- but it at least shows the idea of an effort. In fact if you are talking "more than a half ball hit" then you are also up around 45 degrees. In that case it could be written either 45 degrees elevation or shooting away 45 degrees. I have a feeling both Bob and Dennis would strongly disagree though, because their technical knowledge is telling them a double hit is still very possible even if you are jacked up or angled at 45 degrees, and also with proper technique it is very possible to avoid a double hit at a much more direct angle or more level stroke. Nothing is perfect. My own impression is that shooting away at an angle is a better fudgy way of avoiding a double hit than jacking up is. Jacking up to draw in close proximity for most of us still often produces that sudden lurch of a short distance forward into the object ball that is the indicator for a double hit -- even if jacked up 45 degrees.

Shooting "away" from an OB involves NO amount of "jacking up". Shooting away is accomplished with a level cue, and 45 degrees is not involved whatsoever; the angle is determined solely by sighting the cue stick to clear the OB. However, jacking up 45 degrees or even more is not to be considered shooting "away" from the OB even though the line of the cue stick may not point to the OB because the cue stick can still interfere with the CB after the initial forward stroke causing the double hit.

Shooting away can predetermine a good hit, while jacking up and attempting a more direct hit is always going to be subject to evaluating the shooter's execution by somebody. Shooting away should be the rule and opting a more direct shot should require the shooter to seek 3rd party evaluation.

 

[NH Steve]

Shooting "away" from an OB involves NO amount of "jacking up". Shooting away is accomplished with a level cue, and 45 degrees is not involved whatsoever; the angle is determined solely by sighting the cue stick to clear the OB. However, jacking up 45 degrees or even more is not to be considered shooting "away" from the OB even though the line of the cue stick may not point to the OB because the cue stick can still interfere with the CB after the initial forward stroke causing the double hit.

Shooting away can predetermine a good hit, while jacking up and attempting a more direct hit is always going to be subject to evaluating the shooter's execution by somebody. Shooting away should be the rule and opting a more direct shot should require the shooter to seek 3rd party evaluation.

Right and that's exactly what I said -- shooting away OR jacking up -- "or" -- both times I mentioned both.

 

[Scrzbill]

I played five different people on my road trip to Sacramento and Portland. I didn’t have any problems with any of the players or shots. Why this three day discussion is going on after two weeks is ......Did you guys just start playing last week? When I played in Daly City, the action was hot and heavy. You had to push through the people around to get to your shot. They would be talking to each other in a different language. Look at some of those pictures Mary post. People are standing next to the players. Are we not men! If I ever play any of you again, I’m bringing my protractor to measure shots

 

[Island Drive]

I played five different people on my road trip to Sacramento and Portland. I didn’t have any problems with any of the players or shots. Why this three day discussion is going on after two weeks is ......Did you guys just start playing last week? When I played in Daly City, the action was hot and heavy. You had to push through the people around to get to your shot. They would be talking to each other in a different language. Look at some of those pictures Mary post. People are standing next to the players. Are we not men! If I ever play any of you again, I’m bringing my protractor to measure shots

Right and that's exactly what I said -- shooting away OR jacking up -- "or" -- both times I mentioned both.

Players meeting show & tell.

 

[darmoose]

This is a lot like the jack up 45 degree rule -- it doesn't actually mean that a double hit would be avoided by doing it -- but it at least shows the idea of an effort.

I guess we are not understanding each other, prolly my fault. To be clear, I don't see this "shoot away" rule to be anything like the 45 degree jack up rule; as it does in fact guarantee that a foul will not ensue, and requires no evaluation after the appropriate angle has been established.

In fact if you are talking "more than a half ball hit" then you are also up around 45 degrees. In that case it could be written either 45 degrees elevation or shooting away 45 degrees.

I am not understanding this statement. If one is attempting a fuller than half ball hit, he is not shooting away from the OB. I think to use the 45 degree reference in shooting away from the OB is not the way to describe it, rather you must shoot away at an angle that clearly doesn't allow the cue stick to hit the OB on the follow through.

I have a feeling both Bob and Dennis would strongly disagree though, because their technical knowledge is telling them a double hit is still very possible even if you are jacked up or angled at 45 degrees, and also with proper technique it is very possible to avoid a double hit at a much more direct angle or more level stroke.

While we recognize that it is possible to make a good hit shooting directly at the OB, provided you have a high level of skill, the shooter would be required to solicit 3rd party evaluation of his execution and be bound by that.

Nothing is perfect. My own impression is that shooting away at an angle is a better fudgy way of avoiding a double hit than jacking up is. Jacking up to draw in close proximity for most of us still often produces that sudden lurch of a short distance forward into the object ball that is the indicator for a double hit -- even if jacked up 45 degrees.

I agree, and inasmuch as we want to discourage disagreements, we should promote shooting away from the OB, and only if the shooter gets 3rd party observance of his execution should he be able to shoot more directly at the OB. As you say, nothing is perfect, but if we are going to error we should error on the side of the more doable shot by the majority of players and the exception should be reserved for the rarer players who are willing to have a 3rd party judge their shot execution. This approach would eliminate most if not all disputes whereas the "jack up 45 degrees rule is just a license to cheat with impunity.

 

[darmoose]

I played five different people on my road trip to Sacramento and Portland. I didn’t have any problems with any of the players or shots. Why this three day discussion is going on after two weeks is ......Did you guys just start playing last week? When I played in Daly City, the action was hot and heavy. You had to push through the people around to get to your shot. They would be talking to each other in a different language. Look at some of those pictures Mary post. People are standing next to the players. Are we not men! If I ever play any of you again, I’m bringing my protractor to measure shots

You must just be sweeter than most......................... .......real question is, if you feel that way, why are you still hanging around in here after two weeks..........hhhmmmmm?............I'm think'in we need to pre-check with you to see what we can discuss on this forum, would that work for ya?

 

[Island Drive]

This thread ....is beginning to have the feeling of taP.tAP..TAP...

Yrs ago, there were many BCA referees that could not play very well, and did not understand ball movements.
Many became referees for their ego, not for their skills of understanding the game and it's intricacies.
I learned this while working for the BCA in office when they moved from IA to CO.

Since the skill and experience levels of the players at our events varies greatly, it's understandable why this back and forth dialogue, is happening about opinions of that and this being a legal or illegal shot.

To an experienced player, with the skills of Cardone and a few others, it's pretty simple to make the call. To someone that's not at that level I can see how a Hissing' contest will seemingly continue.

When it comes up, call and experienced player to stand over the shot and make the call....END

 

[LSJohn]

In fact if you are talking "more than a half ball hit"

I specified less than half-ball hit.

And BTW, with the 45 degree elevation rule, no one has a protractor at the table. People are shooting at 30 degrees and less and getting away with it. You can't stop that without a ref, and I've even seen refs stand there watching a shot and approve of something like 30 degrees.

 

[LSJohn]

When it comes up, call and experienced player to stand over the shot and make the call....END

I agree; forget the silly 45 degree rule and call a third party you both agree upon to call the hit.

 

[Scrzbill]

You must just be sweeter than most......................... .......real question is, if you feel that way, why are you still hanging around in here after two weeks..........hhhmmmmm?............I'm think'in we need to pre-check with you to see what we can discuss on this forum, would that work for ya?

I’m not the one that named it 3 day rule/moving on. Most of the discussion is just drivel. I mean really, who doesn’t know what to do when the cue ball rest next to an object ball? The beginning where Dennis had all those new rules? Etiquette changes depending on who and where you play. A lot of people like me follow a thread without commenting and somehow that is shameful?

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

I believe you life time pool playing lifers should really take to heart that when I stated; that in my small town the players have been playing by these close ball foul criteria have several years, and we do not have any problems. If a player does not know the foul criteria they sure learn it fast, and they take pride in knowing it.

These small town players are mainly c & b players. They never been in a real pool hall, never been to a real tournament, never played for money, never seen a real pro. But yet know the foul criteria for these shots, and can call the foul correctly. They also know how to judge a close split hit when playing 8-ball.

This is pretty simple when shooting the cb towards a close ob:
when using below center the cb is not allowed to go past the contact point. This is basic physics 101, if the cb is spinning with draw then how can it legally go past the contact point, it can not, it is physically impossible unless illegally pushed past. Going half way through is amateurish, and of course a foul when playing by the correct high standard. Pretty darn simple to judge.

When using follow the cb must hesitate at the contact point before going forward. Why is this true; because when close to the ob the cb has no inertia and the weight of the ob makes the cb ball hesitate before going forward. Another way to put is that: the cb is not allowed to immediately follow at or near the same speed as the ob without first hesitating. Pretty darn simple to judge.

The same above foul criteria applies when using an elevated cue.

If stroking on an angle:
The cue ball is not allowed to immediately go forward through the tangent line. Based upon your skill level then the appropriate angle is what ever you think you need to not foul. You can not state a specific angle for then if an opponent feels you are not shooting on that angle they would then call a foul, whether or not your fouled, and not based upon the above foul criteria cue ball action.

And for you guys that say this is hard to judge at real speed, I say BS. If my town of b & c players can do it then you lifers can surely do it.
Plus Bob's Pool Quiz is at real speed, and they can be judged.

If this double hit foul criteria is instilled then our players will be playing with the correct standard and at a higher standard than any other pool organization in the world. A very proud statement and moment in the history of pool. It will be historical. Would any member put forth an effort to deny that!

This one pool shot scenario is one of the most frequently happening shot in OP, and yet the most mis-understood maligned shot in all of pool, that has been butchered for decades by not clearly pronouncing what the correct foul criteria is, and now we finally are correcting a wrong, and this is not getting supported.

I suggest you naysayers lifers that could beat the pants off of any of my small town b & c players and have a 100 times more experience, should really suck it up, for they do not complain, but are proud for knowing the proper foul criteria, and play by it! Come play any player in my town, and if you sloppily push though the contact point on a close proximity shot, they will call you on it, guaranteed!

I hope this helps you guys to understand where we are coming from. thanks for the comments, Whitey

 

[darmoose]

I’m not the one that named it 3 day rule/moving on. Most of the discussion is just drivel. I mean really, who doesn’t know what to do when the cue ball rest next to an object ball? The beginning where Dennis had all those new rules? Etiquette changes depending on who and where you play. A lot of people like me follow a thread without commenting and somehow that is shameful?

I don't think anyone said anything about your actions being shameful, not sure where you get that. But, as to the thread extending beyond three days, if you read Whitey's initial explanation of this thread he said that a new subject would be introduced approximately every three days. The current subject "close proximity shots" was brought up by Steve on this past Friday, so I am not understanding your complaints....

 

[Scrzbill]

I don't think anyone said anything about your actions being shameful, not sure where you get that. But, as to the thread extending beyond three days, if you read Whitey's initial explanation of this thread he said that a new subject would be introduced approximately every three days. The current subject "close proximity shots" was brought up by Steve on this past Friday, so I am not understanding your complaints....

I’m really not interested in reponding to your remarks. You’re too antagonistic, confrontational, and rude.

 

[LSJohn]

You’re too antagonistic, confrontational, and rude.

Here it is only March, and I'm ready to nominate an entry for Funniest Post of the Year.

(I can't remember... was it Kipling's Jungle Book where the elephant called the giraffe a lard ass?)

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

Hey guys, I would not get to work up over all this, for very little is going to change in the rules. Some clarifications in the main rules, but when you see italicized statement it is just an alternative / house rule, so it essentially carries no meaning and has no affect on the main rules whatsoever!
Such as these below:
Close proximity shots often come up in One Pocket with no referee available. When shooting towards an object ball(s) in close proximity to the cue ball, it is a double hit foul if the cue ball goes immediately forward past the contact point or forward through the tangent line, without sufficient cue ball reaction time for english to take effect. With advanced skill, it is possible to play these shots without committing a foul. Alternatively, players may agree that shooting away at a sufficiently thin angle reasonably avoids a double hit. A ball declared frozen to the cue ball may be legally stroked through.

Whole ball placed btl is alternative,
BIH-BTL illegal placement whereas the opponent can notify the shooter when the cb is not legally placed or ob is not playable, is an alternative
Rack your own - score - re-rack is an alternative
Offending player places or removes their coins, I believe is an alternative guide line.

Not contacting the rack on the break is an opponent's option to accept the table as is or make the breaker -re-break -1pt foul. I believe this made the main rules
*** Trapping/wedging the cb has been beefed up, main rules

That is about it, thus far, and we are getting close to rapping this up. So relax guys, nothing earth shaking go on.
I have some points I could bring up about Frozen shots.

When a cb is frozen to an ob ball, it is allowed to legally stroke towards the ob, but the stroke has to be one continuous stroke. If the cue is laid against the cb - stroke paused - and then stroked through, it is then a push stroke foul. This is the one and only way to foul stroke a cb frozen to an ob.

Now in the same scenario that has the ob frozen to the cushion, such as in Paul Newman's hustler shot then the same foul criteria applies. You can not lay the cue tip against the cb and push through, and when stroking through the cb, the stroke can not be impeded, meaning jams up against the cb.

Two balls frozen to the cb. I did a whole thread on this with videos, but got little to no response. I doubt if it will even make the alternative list.

Next topic will probably be about the cb frozen to the ob. Whitey

 

[Island Drive]

Unsocial media....strikes again....or did they get a spare....it feels more like a 7/10 split.

Now I've got a daughter, that's 3 mths pregnant and....I'm getting flashbacks of my X and how her character ''tUrnEd'' to the other person, whom I did not enjoy. She will not forgive at this time in life. I pray for her husband....really.

GOOD MORNING...........