Intentional Double Hit

Dredging this thread back up after 20 years - have any updates been made to the rules since then or is this still a grey area?

Asking because it happened during a match yesterday. Both of us are seasoned players and we also had a touring pro, Boris Ivanovski, around us but we didn't really come up with a conclusion other than that it's a grey area. We were going to ask John Leyman his opinion next time we saw him, but I figured I'd ask AzB first.

Screenshot 1 - this was basically the situation in our match (other balls not shown for simplicity). My opponent purposefully pushed through the 7 to break up the dead combo. Legality here seems like a grey area.

Screenshot 2 - what if he pushed through the 7/8 cluster here? That oddly seems less legal.

Screenshot 3 - what if he pushes through with a super long follow through? Or intentionally miscues and scoop jumps over the cluster? Seems definitely not legal.

Screenshot 4 - what if he taps the cueball to reposition it and hits it again while it's moving to break up the cluster? Not legal without doubt.
I actually remember making this topic 20 years ago. Wow

Two fundamentals of pool to avoid sounding foolish for years

I don't expect you to "pound your ideas into people". I'm just trying to understand what you mean by "a mind that is capable of both playing pool and learning pool skills". It is neither clear nor obvious what point you are trying to make.
In fact, quite the opposite.

With perhaps a touch of unfounded arrogance...

Energy transfer from cuetip to whiteball

It’s like when people talk about the follow through. Yes, the CB doesn’t “know” you’ve followed through nor does it care about what you do after you it has left the cue tip. But if you don’t follow through then it is extremely difficult to hit the CB at the point of maximum acceleration.

To me, follow through is more about alignment. The POMA would be more relevant in a distance competition?

findit

They should have slowly returned cues once they had reasonable assurance they were going back to their owners. They probably could had done that with high confidence. If some scammer had enough info and details to scam one or two, just pay the owners for those cues.

I've lost several family members and the first thing I did was made sure all the debt was paid. My family would've wanted that. What Joe's family is doing is shameful.

Pia Filler hates wood shafts

"Highly resistant" to scratches, drops, and dents is not the same as "impervious" to scratches, drops, and dents. No one is claiming that carbon fiber shafts are as easily dinged as wood shafts. What has been pointed out is that carbon fiber shafts are not immune to being damaged, and when that damage occurs, repairs are more complicated, when they're even possible, compared to repairing the same damage on a wood shaft.

Do you believe that if a busy pool room replaced their wooden house cues with carbon fiber cues, the shafts of those new cues would largely remain pristine after a few months of use by bangers?

Experienced players don't frequently ding their wood shafts. Nor are high-quality wood shafts prone to warpage when stored as recommended (e.g., not left in a car year-round). A lot of the so-called advantages of using a CF shaft are really about solutions in search of problems. I'm old enough that I've learned to avoid paying for such solutions. Younger me was more prone to marketing hype.

Like most everything else, it's a tradeoff. It's okay to want a shaft that's more resistant to minor damage, even if that comes at the expense of minor damage being much more difficult to repair when it does happen. It's also okay to prefer a shaft that is easily repaired, even if that repairability comes at the expense of requiring minor repairs/maintenance more frequently. It's about preferences, not about one approach being objectively better than the other.

The most significant "improvement" that carbon fiber shafts bring to the table (so to speak) is their higher profitability. That's great for manufacturers and retailers (assuming enough of the extra profit margin is passed on to said retailers), but less great for players. While the higher margins allow for better sponsored tournament payouts and pro player sponsorships, that extra money comes at the expense of making pool even less financially accessible to new younger players. Too many new (and even experienced) players are susceptible to marketing and social media hype, and they believe that they need a low-deflection CF shaft if they have any hope of playing well. The reality is that one can become a good player using house cues. It's the archer, not the arrow.
Doubtful anybody reads all that

In terms of frequency and severity of dents, most are of minimal measure- those you and others can address- and 100% avoided with carbon.

The major traumas are rare and all bets are off when you enter that zone

What corner pocket size is this?

If the table looks as good as that corner casting, you may want to jump on it. If it's a tournament edition, it could be 4.75", but it looks like 5.
Exactly. The seller is 100% a banger. No one else would put the tape measure like that. This could be a table that was purchased for a home 20 years ago, and sat almost unplayed with laundry on it most of the time. I've never seen a GC4 casting look that good in bronze. There was a later finish that was more silver color that didn't pit like the bronze one did.

Filter

Back
Top