Paul_#_ said:

The billiard community could be improved if there was a Consumer Reports like evaluation of cue shafts and a description of the materials used in shafts. It could start with deflection scores for ten shafts.

It could publish lists of shafts' energy transferring efficiency of shaft-hit to cue ball (Defy vs Revo!), a description of the technology used (tear the shaft apart and tell players how they are made --- length of carbon-fiber rod in CF/wood shaft; whether cored shaft is hollow, foam or wood; maybe the weight of the first one inch of shaft for deflection purposes.

Click to expand...

This is interesting and I LIKE IT! Let's explore this. So would this be the device or is this the report NPO? If this is the device, the goal of the device would be to measure the resultant vector force from the cue (with tip/pad/ferrule) imparting its kinetic energy to what are you thinking - something like a read pad?

I've always wanted to explore a tool that measures deflection/squirt, but in their very nature (friction + impact point + impact velocity) the results would be a 3D topographical surface in the rough shape of a mound (rotated parabola around the parabolic maximum). Perhaps the inflections points (non-smooth mound points) would speak to imperfections with the tip or asymptotic impacts, but would those imperfections mean manufacturer defects or plastic deformation as a consequence of using the same tip to perform similar tests over and over? hmmm

Looking forward to your response here.

well the answer to why all tables don't have it is obvious and financial related.

my position is this, if you want to be a top player, work on your rhythm so you don't get caught out by the tv table / shot clock. fedor did this consciously, adapted his game to it. and he got the "MR major" monkey of his back (to say the least). he has talked about this in his practice sessions.

nataddrho said:

"Federal law prohibits the operation, marketing, or sale of any type of jamming equipment that interferes with authorized radio communications, including cellular and Personal Communication Services (PCS), police radar, and Global Positioning Systems (GPS)."
Applicable Law

• The Communications Act of 1934
  • Section 301 - requires persons operating or using radio transmitters to be licensed or authorized under the Commission’s rules (47 U.S.C. § 301).
  • Section 302(b) - prohibits the manufacture, importation, marketing, sale or operation of signal jammers within the United States (47 U.S.C. § 302a(b)).
  • Section 333 - prohibits willful or malicious interference with the radio communications of any station licensed or authorized under the Act or operated by the U.S. Government (47 U.S.C. § 333).
  • Section 501 – allows for substantial monetary fines and criminal sanctions including imprisonment (47 U.S.C. § 501).
  • Section 503 - allows the FCC to impose forfeitures for willful or repeated violations of the Communications Act, the Commission's rules, regulations, or related orders, as well as for violations of the terms and conditions of any license, certificate, or other Commission authorization, among other things (47 U.S.C. § 503).
  • Sections 510 - allows for seizure of unlawful equipment (47 U.S.C. § 510).
• The Commission's Rules
  • Section 2.803 - prohibits the manufacture, importation, marketing, sale or operation of unauthorized devices within the United States (47 C.F.R. § 2.803).
  • Section 2.807 - provides for certain limited exceptions, such as the sale to U.S. government users (47 C.F.R. § 2.807).
• The U.S. Criminal Code(Enforced by the Department of Justice or Department of Homeland Security)
  • Title 18, Section 545 – prohibits the importation of illegal goods into the United States; subjects the operator to possible fines, imprisonment, or both (18 U.S.C. § 545).
  • Title 18, Section 1362 - prohibits willful or malicious interference to US government communications; subjects the operator to possible fines, imprisonment, or both (18 U.S.C. § 1362).
  • Title 18, Section 1367(a) - prohibits intentional or malicious interference to satellite communications, including GPS; subjects the operator to possible fines, imprisonment, or both (18 U.S.C. § 1367(a)).

I am sure other countries have similar laws.

Click to expand...

OH MAN!!! Correct. But if I walked this path, I would not be doing that. Federal law doesn't prohibit the public production of sounds that just so happen to be at the exact opposite phase of the sounds produced. I am not touching the radios signal. Read about this new technology from the early 1800s (1801 speci) LINK

Bob Jewett said:

So..., it's complicated. Technically, under the WSR (World Standardized Rules) which Matchroom is using (except for break format, I think), intentionally touching any out of play ball while a game is in progress is unsportsmanlike conduct. An unsportsmanlike foul is penalized as the referee (and maybe tournament management) sees fit. If I were the ref and the object ball did not touch any ball still in play, I would ask the player to please wait for the shot to finish. It's possible that the TD has decided on a specific way to handle this particular USLC.

If your opponent knocks a ball off the table (a foul) and it rolls over to your chair, and you pick it up, that is technically unsportsmanlike conduct. The possible penalties range from nothing to ejection from the tournament and forfeiture of all prizes and ranking points, according to the judgement of the officials. If you were the ref, how would you penalize a player for returning a lofted ball?

The rules used to have a clause explicitly allowing the players to touch out of play balls to help the referee with his duties, but it is not in the current revision.

Click to expand...

I struggle with this interpretation some. You stated it’s unsportsmanlike conduct to touch balls “out of play”. I know rule 6.17 (b) says it’s unsportsmanlike conduct to change the position of balls “in play”. I always thought you’d interpret balls pocketed to be “out of play”. I was under the impression that the sticking point here is that the referee considers balls pocketed to still be “in play” which I would argue against. But I can’t find where WSR says touching “out of play” balls is unsportsmanlike conduct. Can you provide a citation? I’ve searched.

I thought if any rule was apt it would actually be Regularion 13. The rules indicate that clearing pockets is the responsibility of a referee when present. And Regulation 5 indicates that the non-shooting player can assume the duties of the referee when not present. And between the two the “unsportsmanlike conduct” would be the shooter assuming referee duties when not explicitly indicated they have that responsibility.

But in any event (and disregarding the ridiculous EPBF soccer card system) under Regulation 6 the latitude of the ref should mean the penalty be a warning like “You can sit down. I will clear the pockets.” Just like John Leyman did with Sam and Carlo after the first rack of the Florida Open in Table 1.

I’ve only heard it pronounced “aloe wishes”.

pj
chgo

skor said:

What's the point of having a shot clock only on the TV table?
This favor the top pros who get more TV table time, and does nothing for the game.
I get that on TV we want to see fast action and make it less boring but conditions should be equal to all during a turnament.

Click to expand...

The point is exactly what you said, to make it more exciting for the viewer.