Regular shooting cue

For people that fail to grasp the concept of not being able to use a jump cue in APA, I haven't put that much thought into the whole rule in my 7 years of playing. If somebody feels that they should be able to use a jump cue in APA, they should grow a pair and suck it up like everybody else in the league or they can go tell mama.

Learn how to kick.

TheNewSharkster said:

REGULAR SHOOTING CUE: Any standard pool cue designed to shoot the
majority of shots in a game of pool.


What does this mean to everyone? Do you think they mean a break/jump cue when they define it as a cue designed to shoot most pool shots?

Click to expand...

This means you can jump with your playing cue.

Regular shooting cue = My playing cue... not my break cue or my jump cue...

Although I do occasionally break and jump with my playing cue.

i think anyone who plays pool and says they don't don't know what regular shooting cue means is just being a smart ass.
if anyone really doesn't know i have an apa 2 on my 9 ball team who can't shoot a simple cut shot but she'll be happy to educate you on what you're "regular" or "game" or "cue you shoot most of your shots with" cue means. she also be happy to point out a jump cue, and at least what each member of our team breaks with.
i wish people would get over it. the apa sucks. we get it. you can't jump in apa we get it. but the rule is clear and easy to understand. and for so many people that hate the apa, god damn it. i can't one of the free practice tables out of the 25 tables that mr. cues gives us. all i want to do is warm up and the 100 or so people who show up every night of the week (except friday and saturday when there is no league) just eat up the practice tables.
must be all the bangers and people who don't know shit that i keep hearing about.

The APA's failure to adequately address the double hit that occurs when the Cue Ball and Object Ball are close together is much bigger deal than this one.

droveto said:

The APA's failure to adequately address the double hit that occurs when the Cue Ball and Object Ball are close together is much bigger deal than this one.

Click to expand...

Did you know that there actually is a rule on this that the refs in Vegas use, and we have adopted it in our region as well? Here is how that one goes:

If the cueball is closer than the width of a piece of chalk to the object ball, there is a high likelihood that a double hit will occur. If you jack up 45 degrees (approx) or shoot the ball at an angle, it WILL NOT be a foul. If you don't do one of these things, and the cueball moves forward, it will be a foul. If the cueball is frozen to the object ball, you can do whatever you want...including shoot straight through.

I know there are many examples of how you could jack up and still foul, or not jack up and not foul. The rule as stated makes it super simple, and very easy to enforce. I would say that after the year we have been using it in our area, it works fine. It has definitely cut way down on those shots where the cueball takes off like a rocket after the object ball which is a blatant double hit.

They ought to add something about this to the rule book too.

KMRUNOUT

KMRUNOUT said:

Did you know that there actually is a rule on this that the refs in Vegas use, and we have adopted it in our region as well? Here is how that one goes:

If the cueball is closer than the width of a piece of chalk to the object ball, there is a high likelihood that a double hit will occur. If you jack up 45 degrees (approx) or shoot the ball at an angle, it WILL NOT be a foul. If you don't do one of these things, and the cueball moves forward, it will be a foul. If the cueball is frozen to the object ball, you can do whatever you want...including shoot straight through.

I know there are many examples of how you could jack up and still foul, or not jack up and not foul. The rule as stated makes it super simple, and very easy to enforce. I would say that after the year we have been using it in our area, it works fine. It has definitely cut way down on those shots where the cueball takes off like a rocket after the object ball which is a blatant double hit.

They ought to add something about this to the rule book too.

KMRUNOUT

Click to expand...

That is how our LO runs it around here. It is also stated that if you are to watch for a double hit, that the person must be given an explanation of how to avoid the foul(ie- tell them what you just said up there). It really makes it easy. Most people are so concerned about jacking up on the shot that they miss anyways tho.

KMRUNOUT said:

Did you know that there actually is a rule on this that the refs in Vegas use, and we have adopted it in our region as well? Here is how that one goes:

If the cueball is closer than the width of a piece of chalk to the object ball, there is a high likelihood that a double hit will occur. If you jack up 45 degrees (approx) or shoot the ball at an angle, it WILL NOT be a foul. If you don't do one of these things, and the cueball moves forward, it will be a foul. If the cueball is frozen to the object ball, you can do whatever you want...including shoot straight through.

I know there are many examples of how you could jack up and still foul, or not jack up and not foul. The rule as stated makes it super simple, and very easy to enforce. I would say that after the year we have been using it in our area, it works fine. It has definitely cut way down on those shots where the cueball takes off like a rocket after the object ball which is a blatant double hit.

They ought to add something about this to the rule book too.

KMRUNOUT

Click to expand...

When I played in Vegas nationals in 2006 (I think that was the year), this rule was definitely not in place, or the refs were not aware of it. I called a ref over before the shot, he watched, my opponent pocketed his ball in the corner 6 feet down table while the cue ball hit the rail one inch away from the pocket the object ball went in and at the same time. A "good hit" was called by the ref... In the end I've realized that I should and could still win the match with a bad call by a ref, and that it's weak to focus on this one shot in that match that I lost instead of what were probably a few missed run outs, but for years I had no interest in participating in APA events beyond team night because I was soured so much by this call.

It would not be hard to stamp out this problem. National office directs league operators to send an email to all the captains with a video describing and showing the double hit explaining how it can't be possible to get the cue ball and object ball to ever move together at the same velocity. I have had SL2's on my teams that knew not to ever line up for this shot. This SL2 would have been ranked a 0.5 if that ranking existed, he was that bad, but even he understood that most humans don't have the control to hit an object and then stop the cue within the next 1-5 mm of travel after striking the ball and also understood that you can't get the cue ball and object ball to move together without some second force being applied to the cue ball. I see this shot happen 10-12 times/year in the APA matches and it's my only real serious area of frustration with playing in the APA. I don't lose any sleep over it, but if I were going to spend time complaining about APA situations, this is definitely the area I gravitate towards.

droveto said:

The APA's failure to adequately address the double hit that occurs when the Cue Ball and Object Ball are close together is much bigger deal than this one.

Click to expand...

It's actually quite the opposite... APAs rules which allow a doublehit/push through to occur make it not a big deal at all.

Icon of Sin said:

It's actually quite the opposite... APAs rules which allow a doublehit/push through to occur make it not a big deal at all.

Click to expand...

They do not allow a double hit and a double hit is not the same as a push. A push occurs when the balls are frozen.
A cue is not allowed to strike the cue ball a second time after it has already been struck.
Under your supposed knowledge of the rule a player could accidentally tap his cue ball, and if he knows it wasn't hit hard enough to get a ball to a rail, he could tap it again to give it a little more velocity without it being a foul. Do you believe this is a fair play? I'm going to assume that you don't think so, and now that we're at that point where do you see a rule stipulation that says there's a difference of rules when the cue ball is a short distance away from the object ball as opposed to a longer distance? You can't produce this rule because it doesn't exist which means double hits are ball in hand fouls.

(I should probably start a new thread as opposed to hijacking this one...)

Moving my mission to eliminate the double hit from the APA to this thread:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=278330

The only information I could find is here regarding this rule. I cannot find anything specifically about a break cue itself but stumbled across a ruling for weight limits, (there are no rules on cue weight).

Another interesting nugget in that rule is that the standard, "No Jump Shots Allowed" signs that almost every pool hall has are binding. If the hall has the sign and your opponent makes a legal jump shot you can call it a foul.