If someone gives it to you, you take it. Bittersweet or not. Id rather have the bittersweet victory then a loss.
Opinions on "forced win" rule.
- Thread starter Mr. Bond
- Start date
Normally yes, but when the rules were read to the players before the event it was declared that conceding a game results in the loss of that rack, plus the next. I have seen that in a couple of tournaments now I believe mostly to protect the pay per view crowd from feeling like they didn't get to see the games fully played out. Which as I mentioned earlier would have backfired in this case.
Don't get me wrong, I'm guilty of much worse when I get too frustrated at the table, but in my opinion (and it's usually not worth much), rules are rules.
Sorry, I didn't read you initial post close enough. I see you point about him not necessarily conceding the game. technically it is different than either throwing the ball in the pocket or grabbing the balls to rack the next game.
Depends why the rules are there. In some case they are there to resolve disputes before they happen. If it's a case of player B who has been playing sick the whole match finally needing to take a dump, or player B needing to entertain a phone call that has a potential personal impact way beyond who wins a pool match and some money, then player A could be "nice" and overlook any time penalty. The referee could be human and tag along. The rules say player A wins but, lets be really honest here, the player A who doesn't say let's play is a either a low life or an ignorant tool in this situation - but his or her right to take the win should indeed be respected and that's life and the ref has to agree.
If on the other hand it's some guy wandering off and then coming back 10 minutes later and saying let's play then of course the rules should apply. Same goes for deliberate fouls and concessions.
Just common sense.
Last edited:
If you give your opponent a second chance to win after they officially lost, then you deserve to lose.
Of course. You also deserved to lose if you lost already. No difference.
Hopefully never. If that's what this thread is about then I'm all wrong.
Last edited:
As far as I know your opponent does not have a leg to stand on about the issue of a foul, A-the foul must be called when it happens, if another shot takes place before the foul is called its the same as it never happening, B-it is the opponents duty to call the foul, not a spectator, C-in a foul dispute the call goes to the shooter.
I have played opponents who I could tell didnt play many tournaments or have not played very long, if I see them about to commit a foul I will often stop them and alert them about what they are doing or about to do wrong. I dont like to win over technical rule issues. In a case like your opponent I wouldnt tell him sh#t for acting like an asshat.
In our tournaments, you cannot leave the match table while your opponent is shooting. You may only leave the table for a restroom break while it is either your turn at the table, or between games, regardless of who is breaking. I find it hard to believe the urge to go would come on someone so fast that they can't wait a couple minutes.
Wait 'til you're my age......
So I guess a rule is a rule until it isn't a rule.
Last edited: