Thorston gives Ko Pin Yi a pass

[gordml]

Exactly...

If you don't consider pool to be a gentlemen's game then I wouldn't want to play with ya.When Im in pool halls I know which characters to avoid.

Perhaps you don't even know what a gentleman is or what I meant when I pointed out that it's the spirit of the rule that is what's important. If the combination was totally obvious is it really a foul to not call an obvious shot?
And remember 10 ball is a new game where the attempt is to get rid of all the "slopping" and "fluking" thats in 9 ball.
We dont know what are all the hard and fast rules about what to call and what not to. I think its always obvious when someone "slops" a ball so if its left up to the discretion of the players thats fine.

Years ago in England Jimmy White was in the finals of a championship snooker match against Stephen Hendry. These guys had played in the finals 5 previous times and all had gone to Hendry.
In this 6th final it was tied late in the match when the ref mistakenly called a foul on Stephen Hendry but Jimmy noticed and pointed it out to the ref which allowed Hendry to keep shooting.
Stephen Hendry won the match and his 6th Snooker World championship.
Jimmy White is (0-6) in World Champion finals but is considered the best snooker player ever to not win a World Championship.
He has no regrets.
Thats a gentleman.

 

[alstl]

I like the called shot rule, although the one rule I don't like in 10 ball is when you call a save, and you make a ball, the other person can have you shoot again.

Plenty of times I have lost matches due to missed balls going in in 9-ball. Almost no-one in my pool room will play called shot 10-ball anymore. A few tried, but gave up as they did not win nearly as much. Although even with 9-ball rules 10-ball is a tougher game, I'd rather take away the "4-banks cross corner off the 5" win.
As far as actually calling all shots, eh, that's up to the players. All depends on who you are playing, some people I watch like a hawk for fouls that they don't call on themselves, some I can head over to take a crap for 10 minutes and be safe that if they guy missed his next shot or fouled, he'll be sitting there waiting for my turn when I show up to the table again.

How often does that come up? Once every 50 racks? In this match with Thorsten how many games were won by slop and "saved" by the call shot rule? I'm guessing zero. Yet there was a game where a guy forgot to call an obvious shot and the referee tried to take the game away from him.

We disagree, I think it creates more problems than it solves.

 

[JarnoV]

or what I meant when I pointed out that it's the spirit of the rule that is what's important. If the combination was totally obvious is it really a foul to not call an obvious shot?

If the game is call-shot, you have to the draw the line somewhere and the most logical and obvious line is demanding an explicit call whenever the shot involves combinations, caroms, banks, etc. Yes, it means that you have to call really obvious combos, but it makes the rule more clear.

Edit: yeah, and it's not a foul. You just lose your turn.

 

[Monto P2]

If a ball is not called it is not a foul shot, only the turn changes to the other player and it is his option to continue from there or ask the first player to play again. I think thats what thorsten did.
But still it takes a lot of heart to do it. Way to go Thorsten. Thats what world champions are made of.

 

[Nostroke]

Thorsten is a good man. That's the right thing to do.

I also feel that the ref (if present) should have the power to decide if a ball was made in the intended pocket. Efren almost lost 2 games at Mohegan Sun because he forgot. He has been playing 40 years without calling the pocket and to suddenly punish him on an obvious shot is just ridiculous.

I wrote Matt Braun the Mohegan Sun promoter and asked him to give the ref this power but he blew me off. Pool is not a memory test imho.

 

[ShootingArts]

didn't see the shot

I didn't see the shot so I can't really say what I would have done. If the combo was hanging in the pocket I might have indicated to the ref that I preferred to let my opponent continue play, I might not have. To be honest it depends a lot on the opponent and his reputation. Someone I don't know or who has a good reputation as a gentleman at the table gets a little more slack than someone known as a jerk. Then again, if someone is showing good manners and etiquette at the table during our match I may ignore the history. Somebody with a history of being a jerk who is acting that way in the little things a person can do to be annoying at the table isn't going to get any favors from me. Of course if the compo was less obvious then we enter into the area of when it becomes questionable enough to need a call. I still remember losing my inning many years ago for not calling a bank that was extremely obvious. When I cooled off I realized the rule was there for a reason.

The problem is that there is a huge gray area between "obvious" and "not obvious" shots. Two balls frozen to each other in a pocket mouth is obvious. When one ball has to be cut into another ball to cut it into the pocket with a diamond or two of spacing between everything it's usually not obvious. Many shades of gray in between though and that is why I approve of the rules that any combo or bank isn't obvious. I HATE gray areas in rules. When the rule is as clear and simple as this one there should never be an issue if the shot should be called or not. If it isn't called in truth we have no complaint coming even if the ball combo'ed into was totally blocking the pocket.

Thurston seems to be one of the classier players and I understand his thinking. I also understand Neil's "rules are rules" approach and I wouldn't fault either one. I made a huge mistake more recently. I thought the tournament was all ball fouls and picked up the cue ball to hand to my opponent. They pointed out that inadvertently contacting another ball wasn't a foul and were going to let me replace the cue ball. All I could say was picking up a cue ball is a foul and hand it to him!!

Hu

 

[Jaden]

I thought you meant something else....

Say what??? So, to you, it's dishonorable to make that great shot that will put the pressure on him, to raise the bet to where he isn't in his comfort zone, to run a bunch of racks on him to put some fear in him, ect.???

Getting your opponent to start 'choking, or dogging shots' is half the battle if you want to win. There are many ways people attempt this. Many honorable ways. Granted, there are also many unhonorable ways people attempt it also.

I think it is dishonorable to play different than you otherwise would with the sole intention of throwing off your opponent. There are places for that....(road play, hustling) but professional tournaments should be played with a higher regard for the game IMO.

But what do I know. My mental game is usually in the toilet...
Luckily I have a little bit of skill to sometimes get myself out of it.
Jaden

 

[Neil]

...............

 

[malvindo]

That's what champions do. They have integrity no matter how high the stakes are. They'd rather lose than win on a technicality. He's not the only pro that would have done that, David Alcaide called a bad hit on himself Hill-Hill in the Quarter or Semi Finals of the World Cup a year or two ago that no one saw but him! You needed slow mo replay to see that one.

Moral of the story, we should all aspire to this level of integrity.

totaly agreee
win or loose it's a game, but when thorsten done that, he won a lot of respect
i think that much more harder to achieve

 

[steev]

Interesting that you think that people that play by the rules have no integrity, and are abusing rules when they state a rule, and you just don't happen to like that rule.

It's long past due that I ignore you completely. Welcome to the list, population 4.

-s

 

[Neil]

................

 

[Neil]

..................

 

[Neil]

................

 

[malvindo]

duh some argument
i just want to inform u guys
28 July noon, when press confrence all the guinness ambasador try to educate public in here abt 10 ball
the player is ricky yang & svb , thorsten & mika explain the rules n the situation
in that part both thorsten n mika said abt if obvious do not need to call
its gentlement agreement they said

if abt obvious or not i think all of world class player will know which obvious which is not i think if same level player they agree in knowledge but not admit if want call a foul

so thorsten think he need to give example maybe but what i see in his face after the game, very2x not disturb, he congratulate ralf when met after ralf win

so 2 thumps up for thorsten

people may agree or disagree what he done

but he win my respect

OOT

if Earl in that position? with his track record, u all know lah

he need to sharking to win, why? becos i think he not capable to win technically so need to disturb opponent concentration

if Earl come here to Asia with money or sponsor , i know many filipino will que to play him money game with him :grin:

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

I didn't actually see this but it is an interesting situation. I see Neil's point about offending the ref, but I also understand and admire TH calling it on himself.

I would imagine this situation was covered in the players meeting. The WPA rule:

For a called shot to count, the referee must be satisfied that the intended shot was made, so if there is any chance of confusion, e.g. with bank, combination and similar shots, the shooter should indicate the ball and pocket. If the referee or opponent is unsure of the shot to be played, he may ask for a call.

On the one hand it would seem that any combination should be called. On the other hand, assuming the 3 didn't pass the 7 to the pocket then perhaps to TH the combination WAS the obvious shot so he didn't feel right about it. I'm guessing the 3 didn't pass because it wasn't like he was shooting a combo at the money ball looking for an early rack win. Also the rule states that the ref or opponent, if unsure, can ask the player to call. Neither the ref nor TH asked for such a call.

In this situation I don't think TH was offending the ref. The ref is just enforcing the technical rule. By TH not accepting the foul call, he was just letting the ref know that he knew his opponent was playing the combo and was therefore not unsure of the shot. In addition, the way I read the rule is that if the ref was unsure he should have asked the player to call it.

I guess it really all depends on exactly what was gone over in the players meeting. If in the meeting it was stated that all combos had to be called then the WPA rule, as written, would not apply.

But I say good for TH!! :thumbup:

 

[S.Tat]

I don't know how many people on here play call shots 10-ball, but when a player slops a ball in (which this situation can be "technically" considered as since Yi didn't call it), the opposing player gets the option to pass the shot back or take the shot from where the cue ball lays.

It was no disrespect to the ref for Thorston to pass the shot back, he did not sweep a rule under the rug or anything of that sort as many of you seem to believe.

I play call shots 10-ball and this situation comes up once in a while, but I let it pass if it's obvious and I'll ask my opponent if I'm unsure but then again, I don't play for any significant amounts.

 

[JarnoV]

I don't know how many people on here play call shots 10-ball, but when a player slops a ball in (which this situation can be "technically" considered as since Yi didn't call it), the opposing player gets the option to pass the shot back or take the shot from where the cue ball lays.

It was no disrespect to the ref for Thorston to pass the shot back, he did not sweep a rule under the rug or anything of that sort as many of you seem to believe.

Very good point!

 

[grindz]

tap tap tap...

In a true "gentlemens" game, what Thorston COULD have done was right after the ref called the foul, he could have walked to the table and lightly touched the cueball (or any ball on the table for that matter), thus "disturbing without moving" it and giving the table right back to his opponent. This would not have circumvented any rules, and play would have continued just as it did anyway but WITHOUT overriding the refs call. Of course, it would have taken a "gentlemens" gesture by Ko Pin Yi to NOT take ball-in-hand. This would have easily resolved the situation without disrespect to the ref and would have left the table situated in the very same condition.

Of course, as one poster stated, pool is not what one would call a "gentlemens" game.

Maniac

I know I've fallen short on 'sportsmanship' before, and probably will again..
but you've given a great example of what I (and I hope all others) aspire
to. Well said.

td

 

[Neil]

..................

 

[mikeyfrost]

O.K., first off, I will state that I was unclear on the rules. Been a while since I read them. If a shot is not called, the opposing shooter has the option to take it or pass it back. This is what Thorsten did. No rule violation.

According to another poster, apparently in the players meeting, they agreed that they did not have to call obvious combos. That being the case, Thorsten had no choice but to pass this shot back as the ref had to call it. To do so otherwise would be very dishonorable. So, nothing against Thorsten at all, but no big deal that he passed it back. He had already agreed to do so.

My whole problem with this all, is that if one is playing by a set of rules, then they should play by that set of rules. If they don't like the rules, then play by a different set of rules. But, if in a tournament, you have a set you have to abide by. You don't go getting to change them as you go along. When you abide by the rules, then you have integrity. When you don't, you don't.

Now, as to this case, the rules state that you should call non-obvious shots, such as combos and banks. In this case, there was an agreement before the match, that if they felt it was obvious, even being a combo or bank, they would not have to call it.

If that agreement was not there, I feel there would be no loss of integrity on anyones part to take the shot after their opponent did not call it. That's part of the rules, and, especially at the pro level, you are responsible to know what rules you are playing by.

Someone else , I think Williebetmore, asked when golf would be brought up. I'll do it now. You have a golf tournament, you are required to turn in a correct score sheet, if you don't, you are disqualified. Not too long ago, in some big golf tourney, some one inadvertently turned in an incorrect score card. Their intent was to be totally honest. But, there was a wrong score on it. They were disqualified after getting well into the money.

Now, according to some on here, the rest of the golfers should have said, "no problem, we honor your score". That did not happen. The guy screwed up, and paid dearly for it. I'm sure not one other golfer thought, "hey, we know he wasn't trying to cheat, let him have the win." They knew what the rule was, and felt bad for the guy that inadvertently broke it. But, the rule stood.

So, my whole stance is, abide by the rules. In this case, Thorsten did. Both the written rules, and the rules they agreed to in the players meeting. While I feel that Thorsten is a very respectable player, I don't see where this particular call makes him an exception to others. All he did is keep his word.???

"Spirit of the Rule" if you know what that means and you don't agree with that concept I don't know what to tell you. Call your pocket is intended to eliminate slop, that's it.

The reason why Toasty is honorable and has a lot of integrity is because he's the man plain and simple. True champion.