I think the best example I have is here (starting at 1:15):
Another example can be found in "Part 2 - small gap between the CB and OB" (starting at 6:29) here:
Regards,
Dave
Another Useful Shot
- Thread starter HereWeGo
- Start date
Another example can be found in "Part 2 - small gap between the CB and OB" (starting at 6:29) here:
Regards,
Dave
Well stated. I agree 100%. This is one reason Bob and I shot all of the clips for the "referee quiz" (NV B.61) and the "foul category instructional videos" (NV B.63). I think a lot of people would be better at recognizing foul and fair hits if they were to watch these videos.And herein lies one of my pet peeves with pool. Too many don't want to take the time to educate themselves on what constitutes a good and a bad hit, so they make up their own rules.And, by doing so, they limit the possibilities of what they actually can do.
Regards,
Dave
sph3ric pyramid
Registered
Oh, right - when the CB clearly jumps. Do you think it's possible for the CB to legally go forward on a jacked up close hit without jumping much? I can't imagine how. In fact, the cue ball not jumping may be another indication of a double hit.
pj
chgo
Last edited:
As you know, a heavier CB (e.g., on some bar boxes) will tend to go forward a little, but not as much as with an above-the-OB-equator hit that usually occurs with a jacked up shot.
Good point.
Regards,
Dave
I get the thinking that those vnea rules of thumb have holes and leave room for abuse, but I sincerely believe that without them, there will be even more abuse than there is now. It's easy to say "just let everyone get more education on what a double hit looks like"... the problem isn't just education but honesty. The rules force players to be honest in a lot of situations where they'd otherwise try to get away with murder.
No rule for this stuff will be perfect, but if it clears up..I dunno... 80% of the fouls or so, I'd call that progress.
After some thinking, I gotta disagree on allowing the close-up jump shots. Your video showed the most borderline double-hitting example possible, so jumps at that distance can maybe be forgiven if it's too close to call... but when guys jump nearly frozen balls they are breaking the rules to accomplish something that is not normally possible. I shaft will bend only so much before it's clearly got to be helping the cue ball go forward and clear the OB.
There are a few rare cases where intentional fouls can help make an impossible shot possible (like a super fast double hit to shove an OB into the side when it's barely blocked by the nipple). The big difference here is that these 80 degree+ jump shots look ok 'visually', making them very hard to detect and call compared to the more blatant push fouls. But it's still getting away with something. I'm not even convinced it's all that difficult. It's just rarely practiced.
No rule for this stuff will be perfect, but if it clears up..I dunno... 80% of the fouls or so, I'd call that progress.
After some thinking, I gotta disagree on allowing the close-up jump shots. Your video showed the most borderline double-hitting example possible, so jumps at that distance can maybe be forgiven if it's too close to call... but when guys jump nearly frozen balls they are breaking the rules to accomplish something that is not normally possible. I shaft will bend only so much before it's clearly got to be helping the cue ball go forward and clear the OB.
There are a few rare cases where intentional fouls can help make an impossible shot possible (like a super fast double hit to shove an OB into the side when it's barely blocked by the nipple). The big difference here is that these 80 degree+ jump shots look ok 'visually', making them very hard to detect and call compared to the more blatant push fouls. But it's still getting away with something. I'm not even convinced it's all that difficult. It's just rarely practiced.