10 ball rule question

S

skjacobpool

Registered
Hi,

I´ve got a question regarding a specific 10 ball situation when a player on the table calls a shot, but misses and does not make neither the called ball or any other ball, instead, the situation ends up as a safety - doesn´t really matter if the incoming player is "snookered" or not, simply that he finds this situation to be a result of an unintended safety. Is he permitted to let and force his opponent play this shot ? I looked it up in the WPA rules, but I found it misleading as it says :

9.7 Wrongfully Pocketed Balls
If a player misses his intended ball and pocket, and either makes the nominated ball in the wrong pocket or pockets another ball, his inning has finished and the incoming player has the option to take the shot as is, or hand it back to his opponent.

But IMO it doesn´t cover this situation -it is an implication A -> B where "A" is the cause - player misses a called shot AND makes the called ball in another pocket or makes another ball. "B" is the consequence of it - his opponent chooses between 2 possibilities. The point I´m trying to make now is that we cannot revert this rule and say "A player is permitted to hand back the shot to his opponent when his opponent had missed an intended shot and....

That is because there is no clear equivalence relation between "A" and "B" and therefore the implication B -> A may or may not be true.

I apologize for this kind of explanation, I don´t want to sound and seem like some nerd or something, I just try to prevent any of you from using incorrect logic explanation that IMHO is not acceptable when it comes to rules.Also, I know that my opinion and this post can contain some error, but at the moment I am not aware of anything I might have misunderstood or abused. Also, it is half past midnight here :-) so I am just ready to go to sleep :-)

Here it comes - a simplification of the above - When is the incoming player permitted to force his opponent play the shot he left ?

Thank you for an explanation and once again, sorry for the post which I ultimately find much more complicated and misleading as originally planned. It turned into an English writing practice, something I should really continue to work on.

Best regards and sorry for any language error as well as taking your time.

I´m just really curious about this game situation :-)
 
I'll assume you are talking about a ring game scenario. If push out rules haven't been specified and its not an intentional safe...play as lies. If using push outs, the player pushes out with next man's option to shoot or give back the shot. If the shot is a foul, the next man can force the shooter to shoot again from where it lies.
If your talking 10 ball between two opponents like tournament style its the same as 9 ball...play as lies if no foul committed. If foul is committed, ball in hand, but you wouldn't need to call shots in this format unless specified by a specific tournament rule.
Best info I can give without understanding more on the specific game type/situation.
 
[a and (b or c)] --> d

A = Player misses the called ball and pocket
B = Player makes the called ball in the wrong pocket
C = Player makes a non called ball in a pocket
D = Incoming player has the choice to shoot or give the table back.

skjacobpool said:
...a player on the table calls a shot, but misses and does not make neither the called ball or any other ball, instead, the situation ends up as a safety
Click to expand...

The antecedent [A AND (B OR C)] where the [Player misses the called ball AND (Makes the called ball in the wrong pocket OR pockets another ball)] is false in your above case. Thus the consequence [Incoming player has the choice to shoot or give the table back] cannot be reached using rule 9.7.

The shot falls to the incoming player with no option to hand it back whether snookered or not.

skjacobpool said:
There is nothing in the rule that implies it is an equivalence relation...
Click to expand...

Correct.

skjacobpool said:
The point I´m trying to make now is that we cannot revert this rule and say "A player is permitted to hand back the shot to his opponent when his opponent had missed an intended shot and....

That is because there is no clear equivalence relation between "A" and "B" and therefore the implication B -> A may or may not be true.
Click to expand...

Correct.

skjacobpool said:
Here it comes - a simplification of the above - When is the incoming player permitted to force his opponent play the shot he left ?
Click to expand...

Under current WPA rules, the incoming player can give the table back when his opponent misses his called ball and pocket AND an object ball goes in a pocket. (Could be the called ball in a non called pocket or some other object ball in any pocket.)

You could Logically say !D --> [!A OR (!B and !C)] through Transposition and De Morgan's Theorem applied twice, but that is just a can of worms to untangle.

If the incoming player has no choice to give the table back then [the previous player made the called ball in the correct pocket (or they did not pocket the called ball in the wrong pocket and did not pocket any other ball)]

The first part ready awkward but is true since it is still the original players turn. Interestingly this does not account for a scratch where the ball goes in the correct pocket but the opponent can't give it back! The foul rules must supersede this one or someone could argue (correctly) that if the previous player slopped in a ball and scratched then they could give it back. To be logically consistent rule 9.10 would have to say that play passes to the opponent and rule 9.7 is not in effect. It may be hidden in there somewhere else...

9.10 Standard Fouls
If the shooter commits a standard foul, play passes to his opponent. The cue ball is in hand, and the incoming player may place it anywhere on the playing surface. (See 1.5 Cue Ball in Hand)

JonnyB
 
JonnyB said:
A = Player misses the called ball and pocket
B = Player makes the called ball in the wrong pocket
C = Player makes a non called ball in a pocket
D = Incoming player has the choice to shoot or give the table back.



The antecedent [A AND (B OR C)] where the [Player misses the called ball AND (Makes the called ball in the wrong pocket OR pockets another ball)] is false in your above case. Thus the consequence [Incoming player has the choice to shoot or give the table back] cannot be reached using rule 9.7.

I agree on this, that was the original reason why I asked this.

The shot falls to the incoming player with no option to hand it back whether snookered or not.

I see this as a logical assumption derived from the above, am I right ? So, situation in which the incoming player is permitted to hand back a shot are these :
A) after a push-out from his opponent regardless the position of the balls after the push-out
B) if a player misses a called shot AND in the same shot either makes the nominated ball in wrong pocket or makes any other ball in either pocket.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Player is NOT permitted to hand back a shot to his opponent in a situation when his opponent misses a called shot, but doesn´t make any ball, neither the nominated one in a wrong pocket or any other ball in any pocket. If the incoming player is snookered on the object ball after a failed attempt to make a ball from his opponent and nothing from the above happened, he is also NOT permitted to hand back this shot and must escape this snooker or safety, if not, it will be a foul.

After a foul or a scrath, the incoming player has the cue ball in hand with NO option to hand back this shot. Even though a ball in hand is considered a major advantage in pool, I suggest you to watch this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja9y8Lv_A1s

It is 9 ball, but I just want to say that a player should be permitted to hand back a shot AND also a cue ball in hand even after a scrath or a foul. In this video there is a rare situation going on, but if this was a rule, Foldes wouldn´t play an intentional foul. I hope it is understandable.
Click to expand...
 
skjacobpool said:
The shot falls to the incoming player with no option to hand it back whether snookered or not.

I see this as a logical assumption derived from the above, am I right ?
Click to expand...

9.7 does not apply in this scenario. I see it as an application of the second half of rule 9.8:

9.8 Continuing Play
..... If the shooter fails to pocket the called ball or fouls, play passes to the other player, and if no foul was committed, the incoming player must play the cue ball from the position left by the other player.

skjacobpool said:
So, situation in which the incoming player is permitted to hand back a shot are these :
A) after a push-out from his opponent regardless the position of the balls after the push-out
B) if a player misses a called shot AND in the same shot either makes the nominated ball in wrong pocket or makes any other ball in either pocket.

Correct me if I am wrong.
Click to expand...

Nope. You got it right. Good thinking, I forgot about the A case. :)

skjacobpool said:
Player is NOT permitted to hand back a shot to his opponent in a situation when his opponent misses a called shot, but doesn´t make any ball, neither the nominated one in a wrong pocket or any other ball in any pocket. If the incoming player is snookered on the object ball after a failed attempt to make a ball from his opponent and nothing from the above happened, he is also NOT permitted to hand back this shot and must escape this snooker or safety, if not, it will be a foul.
Click to expand...

Yup, incoming player must shoot and failure to make a good hit would be a foul. Ball in hand for the opponent WITHOUT the option to give it back. :)

JonnyB.
 
I thought it was that the player at the table had to call either a safety or a pocket and that the incoming player had the option to accept the shot as it lays or hand it back when the outgoing player failed to pocket a called ball.

This is how the tournament Corey put on was played. If you go to the action report's website and to the UPL Finals 2 you can see this clearly at the 39 minute mark in the very last game. With only the 10 ball left Corey goes for the pocket and misses and leaves Johnny long and thin and Johny gives it back because Corey did not call a safety.

I don't know if they were playing WPA rules or made up their own but I was fairly sure that this is how they played in in the World 10 Ball championships as well. Which I will check on YouTube.

I have been playing this way for several weeks and I find it to be a much better way to play a rotation game. You aren't going to lose to luck as much.
 
Found this on Easy Pool Tutor's board:

http://forums.easypooltutor.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=11020&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=15

I really think that it's call shot - call safety and if you don't call a safety then the opponent has the right to give the shot back no matter what the position is.

Your question is when can the incoming player hand the shot back:

To my understanding, even though the rules don't state this explicitly it is under the following situations....

1. After a legal push.
2. When the called ball falls into the wrong pocket.
3. When a safety is called but the lowest numbered ball is pocketed.
4. When a ball is called but not made.

#4 is what is not covered in the rules but I am about 85% sure that this is how they played it in the World 10 Ball.
 
Last edited:
Well,

As stated above this rule seems to indicate that I am wrong but I still don't think so.

9.8 Continuing Play
If the shooter legally pockets a called/nominated ball on a shot (except a push out, see 9.4 Second Shot of the Rack – Push Out), any additional balls pocketed remain pocketed (except the ten ball; see 9.9 Spotting Balls), and he continues at the table for the next shot. If he legally pockets the called ten ball on any shot (except a push out), he wins the rack. If the shooter fails to pocket the called ball or fouls, play passes to the other player, and if no foul was committed, the incoming player must play the
cue ball from the position left by the other player.

I think that if I am right then this rule needs to be expanded.
 
JB Cases said:
Well,

As stated above this rule seems to indicate that I am wrong but I still don't think so.

9.8 Continuing Play
If the shooter legally pockets a called/nominated ball on a shot (except a push out, see 9.4 Second Shot of the Rack – Push Out), any additional balls pocketed remain pocketed (except the ten ball; see 9.9 Spotting Balls), and he continues at the table for the next shot. If he legally pockets the called ten ball on any shot (except a push out), he wins the rack. If the shooter fails to pocket the called ball or fouls, play passes to the other player, and if no foul was committed, the incoming player must play the
cue ball from the position left by the other player.

I think that if I am right then this rule needs to be expanded.
Click to expand...

WPA rule is not called safety, if you miss opponent has to shoot.

I tried the call safety rule once, and I think that it soon will be a part of the official rules
 
The UPL 10 ball event was the original inspiration for me to start this thread - I have never seen a situation like that coming up as we were all influenced by the 9 ball rules - but, as this thread has proven, the WPA doesn´t reckognize this rule, but I´m also looking forward fot it been intrduced in the world rules, I think it´s fair and brings a new aspect to the game.
 
skjacobpool said:
The UPL 10 ball event was the original inspiration for me to start this thread - I have never seen a situation like that coming up as we were all influenced by the 9 ball rules - but, as this thread has proven, the WPA doesn´t reckognize this rule, but I´m also looking forward fot it been intrduced in the world rules, I think it´s fair and brings a new aspect to the game.
Click to expand...

I agree because then I see no point in calling a safety. If I am playing under the current WPA Rules then I just call a pocket every time and play safe anyway if I need to.

The UPL rules force the player at the table to make a decision. Go for the ball OR play safe, not both. You can't miss and then get lucky and lock someone up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top