3 Foul Rule- yes or no

[macneilb]

The ONLY way to play.

A great safety is a thing of beauty, especially when they are so many jumpsticks these days.

They can be as tough, (or tougher) than a great shot.

And when you put three of them together.....you deserve the win.

This is the logic I'm seeing most people use to rationalize the 3 foul rule: Well, it takes great skill to lock someone up 3 times in one rack and make them foul 3 times, and that skill should be rewarded by a win, right?...

Well......

If you're going to add another way to win other than running the balls because it takes great skill...then why should you not allowed to win by successfully kicking out of/ or escaping 3 safeties in one rack? It takes just as much skill if not more to escape a great safety does it not? Why then should that skill not be rewarded by a win?

My point is there should only be one way to win a game, which is by making balls and getting out. Yes, safeties are an integral part of the game and they are an art in themselves. However, saying that playing 3 successful safeties in one rack should be rewarded with a win because it takes skill just isn't logical. Getting out of 3 safeties takes the same amount of skill if not more so that should be deserving of a victory by the same logic should it not?

Before anyone starts dogging me for this, I absolutely do believe that safety play is an integral part of the game. I just believe there should be a balance - if the rules say someone can win by playing 3 successful safeties, then I say I should be able to win by succesfully escaping 3 safeties. That, or, we can both only win by one manner: Getting out.

 

[mudball]

This is the logic I'm seeing most people use to rationalize the 3 foul rule: Well, it takes great skill to lock someone up 3 times in one rack and make them foul 3 times, and that skill should be rewarded by a win, right?...

Well......

If you're going to add another way to win other than running the balls because it takes great skill...then why should you not allowed to win by successfully kicking out of/ or escaping 3 safeties in one rack? It takes just as much skill if not more to escape a great safety does it not? Why then should that skill not be rewarded by a win?

My point is there should only be one way to win a game, which is by making balls and getting out. Yes, safeties are an integral part of the game and they are an art in themselves. However, saying that playing 3 successful safeties in one rack should be rewarded with a win because it takes skill just isn't logical. Getting out of 3 safeties takes the same amount of skill if not more so that should be deserving of a victory by the same logic should it not?

Before anyone starts dogging me for this, I absolutely do believe that safety play is an integral part of the game. I just believe there should be a balance - if the rules say someone can win by playing 3 successful safeties, then I say I should be able to win by succesfully escaping 3 safeties. That, or, we can both only win by one manner: Getting out.

Not dogging you just quoting for reference to your balanced point. Rules don't have to be "balanced". Just because you miss a shot in basketball doesn't mean you loose 2 or 3 points. By escaping a safety you are simply executing a great shot, buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut, if you FOUL there should be some sort of punishment.

I'm not necessarily saying there has to be a 3 foul rule, although I do agree with it and think its ok for the game. My biggest gripe is seeing guys in league or even random bangers in open tournaments simply HANDING the cue ball to their opponent after a well executed safety play. It's hilarious and sad at the same time. To see them get punished like they should is great, but to watch them just give up is pretty lame.

The kick safety adds such a great dimension to the game. Think about all the shots we've seen Efren and the other kick safety ambassadors hit. That's an art form, no other way to look at it in my opinion.

If you wanna "kick like a mule" or OMGWTF RUN OUT ALL DAY just stick to 3 ball or 7 ball.

/end rant

 

[Rick S.]

This is the logic I'm seeing most people use to rationalize the 3 foul rule: Well, it takes great skill to lock someone up 3 times in one rack and make them foul 3 times, and that skill should be rewarded by a win, right?...

Well......

If you're going to add another way to win other than running the balls because it takes great skill...then why should you not allowed to win by successfully kicking out of/ or escaping 3 safeties in one rack? It takes just as much skill if not more to escape a great safety does it not? Why then should that skill not be rewarded by a win?

My point is there should only be one way to win a game, which is by making balls and getting out. Yes, safeties are an integral part of the game and they are an art in themselves. However, saying that playing 3 successful safeties in one rack should be rewarded with a win because it takes skill just isn't logical. Getting out of 3 safeties takes the same amount of skill if not more so that should be deserving of a victory by the same logic should it not?


Before anyone starts dogging me for this, I absolutely do believe that safety play is an integral part of the game. I just believe there should be a balance - if the rules say someone can win by playing 3 successful safeties, then I say I should be able to win by succesfully escaping 3
safeties. That, or, we can both only win by one manner: Getting out.

Good point!

Another factor to consider is the three foul rule speeds up the game, and makes it more 'watchable' to viewers. A player will think about pushing balls together to stop a run out, if he's already on 1-2 fouls. IF there is a penalty involved.

Who wants to watch 2 players push a ball around a table continuously, back and forth??

 

[cbi1000]

Come on peeps. I think everyone here is missing the point. Winning on a three foul rule is to penalize the shooter who got hooked.
Let me put it this way:
ME: play a great safe.
OPPONENT: Sees he has a very low chance of hitting ball, and at the time sees that I’ll have a really hard time playing another safety even with ball in hand. So he just picks the ball up and hands it to me.
ME: Now I again have to play another great safe.
OPPONENT: Hands ball to me. Due to the fact he knows the balls are still jacket, no out for me, and if I have ball in hand the odds that I blow the save are higher than making another great safe.
ME: Pull off another great safe.
OPPONENT: hands ball to me.

Endless game. I would have to at some point really move stuff around and still hope to get safe so I could get.

So those of you who think it’s not right to win in a 3 foul rule see this as fair? Who is really playing chicken $$%^ pool here? OPPONENT.

As for this being a advantage for the higher skill level players, I have some tissue for you you stinking babies. Should great pitches in baseball throw underhand to the hitters who suck? If you don’t like being a crappy player then do the following, practice, read books, take lessons, watch better players, or go play APA!

Rant for the day, I feel so much better.

 

[macneilb]

Not dogging you just quoting for reference to your balanced point. Rules don't have to be "balanced". Just because you miss a shot in basketball doesn't mean you loose 2 or 3 points. By escaping a safety you are simply executing a great shot, buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut, if you FOUL there should be some sort of punishment.

I'm not necessarily saying there has to be a 3 foul rule, although I do agree with it and think its ok for the game. My biggest gripe is seeing guys in league or even random bangers in open tournaments simply HANDING the cue ball to their opponent after a well executed safety play. It's hilarious and sad at the same time. To see them get punished like they should is great, but to watch them just give up is pretty lame.

The kick safety adds such a great dimension to the game. Think about all the shots we've seen Efren and the other kick safety ambassadors hit. That's an art form, no other way to look at it in my opinion.

If you wanna "kick like a mule" or OMGWTF RUN OUT ALL DAY just stick to 3 ball or 7 ball.

/end rant

I agree with you 100% - rules don't exactly have to balanced, but in basketball you don't get points for setting 3 picks, or packing 3 of someones shots.

In basketball, baseball, football etc. there is only one way to win - scoring points...or in our case - MAKING BALLS AND GETTING OUT. That IMO is the only way a game should be won. A great safety is a beautiful thing, and getting BIH is a more than fair reward.

If you can't get out playing 9Ball or 10Ball starting with ball in hand, either running out, or running to play another safety later, then YOU are the one who doesn't deserve the win.

 

[sjm]

The "instant loss" rule that comes with the third foul is hardly unique to nine ball. In fact, in eight ball, the game that most people play, making the eight ball out of sequence is also an "instant loss" infraction. Serious infractions, such as a third consecutive foul in a rack of nine ball or making the eight out of sequence in eight ball, cost you a rack. Simliarly, a third consecutive foul in straight pool is a "major infraction" and carries a one rack penalty (15 balls) with it. Not one of these "major infractions" requires an opponent to run the table to claim the penalty associated with the infraction.

There is nothing odd about the three foul rule in nine ball. It is completely consistent with the way other games are played at the pool table.

 

[mudball]

The "instant loss" rule that comes with the third foul is hardly unique to nine ball. In fact, in eight ball, the game that most people play, making the eight ball out of sequence is also an "instant loss" infraction. Serious infractions, such as a third consecutive foul in a rack of nine ball or making the eight out of sequence in eight ball, cost you a rack. Simliarly, a third consecutive foul in straight pool is a "major infraction" and carries a one rack penalty (15 balls) with it. Not one of these "major infractions" requires an opponent to run the table to claim the penalty associated with the infraction.

There is nothing odd about the three foul rule in nine ball. It is completely consistent with the way other games are played at the pool table.

Exactly. Very well put

 

[mudball]

Come on peeps. I think everyone here is missing the point. Winning on a three foul rule is to penalize the shooter who got hooked.
Let me put it this way:
ME: play a great safe.
OPPONENT: Sees he has a very low chance of hitting ball, and at the time sees that I’ll have a really hard time playing another safety even with ball in hand. So he just picks the ball up and hands it to me.
ME: Now I again have to play another great safe.
OPPONENT: Hands ball to me. Due to the fact he knows the balls are still jacket, no out for me, and if I have ball in hand the odds that I blow the save are higher than making another great safe.
ME: Pull off another great safe.
OPPONENT: hands ball to me.

Endless game. I would have to at some point really move stuff around and still hope to get safe so I could get.

So those of you who think it’s not right to win in a 3 foul rule see this as fair? Who is really playing chicken $$%^ pool here? OPPONENT.

As for this being a advantage for the higher skill level players, I have some tissue for you you stinking babies. Should great pitches in baseball throw underhand to the hitters who suck? If you don’t like being a crappy player then do the following, practice, read books, take lessons, watch better players, or go play APA!

Rant for the day, I feel so much better.

Haha I totally agree. I certainly didn't expect to be ranting like this today on AZ

 

[Big Perm]

LOL? So there shouldn't be any safety play in 9 ball? Such a poor mentality to have with the game when a well executed kick-safety is one of the best shots in pool.

I guess if you don't get it ya just don't get it *shrug*

I was gonna let this go, but you seem to be getting a bit self righteous with further posts, so I'm gonna respond....

First, if you read my post that you quoted, you'll see that I admitted to a well played safe.....IMHO, a well played safe is a work of art.....my gripe is with the 3 foul rule......a well played safe gets you BIH, which is plenty of opportunity to set up shots, as well as plan kicks to break clusters, like in straight pool.....breaking up clusters in any game is just as important as running out or a safe....a cluster is not something to fear, nor is pocketing the 9......

And it's not that "I don't get it" nor do I have a "poor mentality"......you aren't right, you simply have a different perspective......I get why people do it, I just don't like it......it's a play that doesn't appeal to me and I don't respect.....it doesn't make me wrong or some lessor pool being....

 

[Myk]

The poolroom where I play has no 3 foul rule in their tournaments, and I miis it BAD. I think it takes away a great option for winning some tough, tied up racks.

 

[mudball]

I was gonna let this go, but you seem to be getting a bit self righteous with further posts, so I'm gonna respond....

First, if you read my post that you quoted, you'll see that I admitted to a well played safe.....IMHO, a well played safe is a work of art.....my gripe is with the 3 foul rule......a well played safe gets you BIH, which is plenty of opportunity to set up shots, as well as plan kicks to break clusters, like in straight pool.....breaking up clusters in any game is just as important as running out or a safe....a cluster is not something to fear, nor is pocketing the 9......

And it's not that "I don't get it" nor do I have a "poor mentality"......you aren't right, you simply have a different perspective......I get why people do it, I just don't like it......it's a play that doesn't appeal to me and I don't respect.....it doesn't make me wrong or some lessor pool being....

Self righteous? Coming from someone who doesn't respect getting 3 fouled? I'll let that go...

Absolutely clusters are apart of the game, you won't get anywhere trying to avoid dealing with them. Sometimes a safety can set up a break out ball as well. Is that being scared? Playing smart doesn't make you wrong or a lesser pool being. I really don't understand how you could equate a guy 3 fouling you to him being "scared" to pocket the 9. Why not ask yourself "How could I have kicked/jumped at that ball better?"

Getting 3 fouled isn't about respect. You have nobody to blame but yourself if you can't get out of it. Don't take it so personal.

 

[Big Perm]

Self righteous? Coming from someone who doesn't respect getting 3 fouled? I'll let that go...

Absolutely clusters are apart of the game, you won't get anywhere trying to avoid dealing with them. Sometimes a safety can set up a break out ball as well. Is that being scared? Playing smart doesn't make you wrong or a lesser pool being. I really don't understand how you could equate a guy 3 fouling you to him being "scared" to pocket the 9. Why not ask yourself "How could I have kicked/jumped at that ball better?"

Getting 3 fouled isn't about respect. You have nobody to blame but yourself if you can't get out of it. Don't take it so personal.

Mud, I am delicate.....like a flower.....this has come up before....:grin:

Your post comes across as "I am right, this is the way it is" and it seems condescending.....if I am wrong, well then I apologize and I am clearly reading you wrong.....I have never been 3 fouled, so I'm not coming from the it happened to me and made me mad last weekend crowd....I just don't like it.....I appreciate defense just like I appreciate my buddy Brad....in small doses....to each their own....

 

[mudball]

Mud, I am delicate.....like a flower.....this has come up before....:grin:

Your post comes across as "I am right, this is the way it is" and it seems condescending.....if I am wrong, well then I apologize and I am clearly reading you wrong.....I have never been 3 fouled, so I'm not coming from the it happened to me and made me mad last weekend crowd....I just don't like it.....I appreciate defense just like I appreciate my buddy Brad....in small doses....to each their own....

I can see my post(s) coming across that way. I enjoy open discussion and value it very highly. This particular subject I guess I feel pretty passionate about and may have come off too strong.

When it comes to pool its so easy to make excuses for bad things that happen. I'm a firm believer in eliminating excuses in my game personally *shrug* I've seen so many people avoid progression because they would rather call someone a chicken shit for playing a safe rather than looking in the mirror, and that bums me out =/

Don't forget to warn your opponent when he is on two, Perm

 

[sjm]

In basketball, baseball, football etc. there is only one way to win - scoring points...or in our case - MAKING BALLS AND GETTING OUT. That IMO is the only way a game should be won. A great safety is a beautiful thing, and getting BIH is a more than fair reward.

Yes, it's true that in team sports, the actions of a single player cannot, as a rule, result in an "instant loss" for the team. But, just like pool, there are infractions in each of these sports that will end the game for the person guilty of that infraction:

Baseball: throwing at a batter intentionally, arguing balls and stirkes
Football: unsportsmanlike conduct, malicious illegal hit
Basketball: second techinical foul in a game

Pool, just like all these sports, has its set of major infractions, and when they are committed, the guilty player is done for that game. Denying those guilty of major iinfractions the right to continue competing until the next game is something seemingly all sports share.

 

[enzo]

I can see my post(s) coming across that way. I enjoy open discussion and value it very highly. This particular subject I guess I feel pretty passionate about and may have come off too strong.

When it comes to pool its so easy to make excuses for bad things that happen. I'm a firm believer in eliminating excuses in my game personally *shrug* I've seen so many people avoid progression because they would rather call someone a chicken shit for playing a safe rather than looking in the mirror, and that bums me out =/

Don't forget to warn your opponent when he is on two, Perm

so true, 100% agreed.

 

[enzo]

This is the logic I'm seeing most people use to rationalize the 3 foul rule: Well, it takes great skill to lock someone up 3 times in one rack and make them foul 3 times, and that skill should be rewarded by a win, right?...

Well......

If you're going to add another way to win other than running the balls because it takes great skill...then why should you not allowed to win by successfully kicking out of/ or escaping 3 safeties in one rack? It takes just as much skill if not more to escape a great safety does it not? Why then should that skill not be rewarded by a win?

My point is there should only be one way to win a game, which is by making balls and getting out. Yes, safeties are an integral part of the game and they are an art in themselves. However, saying that playing 3 successful safeties in one rack should be rewarded with a win because it takes skill just isn't logical. Getting out of 3 safeties takes the same amount of skill if not more so that should be deserving of a victory by the same logic should it not?

Before anyone starts dogging me for this, I absolutely do believe that safety play is an integral part of the game. I just believe there should be a balance - if the rules say someone can win by playing 3 successful safeties, then I say I should be able to win by succesfully escaping 3 safeties. That, or, we can both only win by one manner: Getting out.

if 2 players are involved in a very important game, and the one ball wedges itself in a corner, and two balls roll up on it and it is impossible to hit, well the game from there just wont finish without a 3 foul rule. just for arguments sake, lets say the game is worth 10 grand. these rules are there for perhaps reasons that have historically popped up that most of us are not even aware of, but this is definitely a good rule, as it stops players from fouling intentionally back an forth.

 

[miplayerstour]

I say no to 3 foul because

I feel as if the reward for a great safety or a million great safeties is ball in hand and for players at a higher level especially that should be reward enough. To win a game without pocketing the winning ball takes away from what the game actually is and if it is a difficult out its much more exciting to see well executed outs and well thought out plans as opposed to seeing someone duck and hide. I personally prefer to play it out much more of what the game was meant to be IMO.

 

[nathandumoulin]

ME: play a great safe.
OPPONENT: Sees he has a very low chance of hitting ball, and at the time sees that I’ll have a really hard time playing another safety even with ball in hand. So he just picks the ball up and hands it to me.
ME: Now I again have to play another great safe.
OPPONENT: Hands ball to me. Due to the fact he knows the balls are still jacket, no out for me, and if I have ball in hand the odds that I blow the save are higher than making another great safe.
ME: Pull off another great safe.
OPPONENT: hands ball to me.

Endless game.

Great post. Anyone who reads this and still disagrees with the the 3 foul rule afterwords......just doesn't get it. Either that or they've clearly never been in this situation before, and understood how ridiculously stupid the game is without the rule.

Playing without it is as dumb as bar rules where you have to shoot up table from behind the head string. It's giving the person who fouled the advantage, which clearly doesn't make sense.

Cheers.

 

[sjm]

I feel as if the reward for a great safety or a million great safeties is ball in hand and for players at a higher level especially that should be reward enough. To win a game without pocketing the winning ball takes away from what the game actually is and if it is a difficult out its much more exciting to see well executed outs and well thought out plans as opposed to seeing someone duck and hide. I personally prefer to play it out much more of what the game was meant to be IMO.

Baseball is a game of hitting and fielding ...... usually. Except when a pitcher strikes out the first three batters in an inning. Then there's no hitting or fielding, just an effort so dominating that no offense took place ...... and so it is with the three foul scenario. It takes phenomenal defense to win on three fouls, but it's nearly always very impressive when you see it, as was the case when VanDenBerg got VanBoening on three at the World Pool Masters in Vegas this past May.

 

[atthecat]

Woah. You are way out in left field with that. First off, RARELY does a 3 foul victory occur. On the occasion that it does, I find it quite interesting to see it play out since (at a high level) it can be extremely difficult to pull off. You make it sound like the 3 foul rule is the demise of pool as a spectator sport LOL.

Prime example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja9y8Lv_A1s

Did everyone get up and leave after seeing that?

How great is that! I love watching the pros safety and kick out of them.