Poll: Should Jump Shots Be Banned?

Poll: Should Jump Shots Be Banned?


  • Total voters
    287
  • Poll closed .
I don't think jump shots should be banned at all. I think jump cues should be banned from certain tournaments.
 
Jump cues are a joke. I know guys that don't try to improve their kicking because they're good with the jump cue.

I know a few as well. I use both kicking and jumping, but I would say that it's 75/25 in favor of kicking. The reason I kick more isn't because I suck at jumping, but because a lot of times kicking the ball in or kicking safe is by far the best option.

There's a ton of guys I see who if they're behind a ball they don't even really look at before they're grabbing the jumper.
 
I don't think jump shots should be banned at all. I think jump cues should be banned from certain tournaments.

Again what is a jump cue?

Is it a 58" cue that has a certain taper/tip that makes it good for jumping balls?

In fact I believe that the BCA doesn't actually define a cue as a jump cue. They simply have a minimum length that a cue must be. So if I choose to play with a 41" cue then that is perfectly legal.

I mean what exactly are you wanting to ban?

If we go that route then the Predator cues and all so-called Low Deflection shafts need to be banned as well. After all they claim to allow the user to get more spin. If true then that is another example of the cue doing the work and not the player isn't it?

And how about all the break cues? They also all claim to have "more power".....

The Strickland Javeline? Why is he allowed to play with a 70" cue? He claims it's better so why is he allowed to use a specially modified cue that he claims works better than the standard 58" cues but someone else isn't allowed to use a 41" inch cue?

I have long said that we should abolish all cue variations and stick with ONE cue. Everyone gets a stock house cue with a stock tip and they are not allowed to retaper it, change the ferrule, the tip, the balance, or anything. Everyone uses the same chalk.

THEN we could be sure that there is no equipment advantage between the players and it would be a pure contest of skill. To make it even more interesting you could change the cue specs each event and not tell anyone what they are until the day the event starts. That would be funny.

Well I have had about enough of this round of As The World Jumps. You all work it out and tell me if I can stop making jump handle compartments any time soon. FWIW if anyone cares I started those in about 1996ish after jump cues started getting popular and people had no place to put the handles. I THINK that It's George was the first to make long pockets with jump cue handle sleeves prior to that. I also am not entirely sure but I think Joss was the first name brand cue maker to come out with a Joss jump cue. But I don't think that they ever made a jump/break, have they?

Also it's interesting to note that Schon never came out with a jump cue nor a break/jump.

Anyway I am JUMPING out of this conversation. Let the debate continue and remember to write your local BCA/WPA rep to let them know you want the rules changed. :-)
 
Again what is a jump cue?

There are already tournaments that restrict the use of a separate jump cue. The rule is simply that you can only jump with the cue you are playing with. (You are allowed to use a separate break cue for the break shot, though.) If you want to play with a cue/tip that makes it easier to jump, you are of course allowed that.

There's nothing especially controversial or ambiguous about that.
 
Last edited:
For the most part, the people that want to ban them are the people that can't do them very well.... BUT....

True it isn't a hard skill the learn, but it is a hard skill to master. I consider myself to be able to jump better than 99% of ALL players, but there are still many situations when jumping a ball is just too risky and not the smart option. Knowing that is a skill in its self!

Learn to lock people up when playing safeties.... no more than a ball width gap. That IS a skill to do well, and completely prevents someone from jumping out of it. If you play a sloppy safety, you should expect it to be jumped out of easily, just as it would be kicked out of easily.

But all the same, I'd have no issue playing in a tournament that didn't allow them... even though it is taking interesting part of the game away.
 
There are already tournaments that restrict the use of a separate jump cue. The rule is simply that you can only jump with the cue you are playing with. (You are allowed to use a separate break cue for the break shot, though.) If you want to play with a cue/tip that makes it easier to jump, you are of course allowed that.

There's nothing especially controversial or ambiguous about that.

So those tournaments favor the players who use playing cues with good "jumpabilty" and handicap the players whose cues are not well suited to jumping.

That seems fair.
 
So those tournaments favor the players who use playing cues with good "jumpabilty" and handicap the players whose cues are not well suited to jumping.

So they do. But that resolves completely the controversy of defining a jump cue.

From what I remember seeing those matches, I didn't see anyone jumping with their playing cue at all. If they had used their jump shot, they were resorting to kick shots.

You were trying to imply that it's impossible or difficult to disallow jumping or jump cues because of the ambiguity, which is a false implication. The rules are not an issue. Whether or not it should be banned is of course open to discussion.
 
No! I saw Larry Nevel last night at the Turning Stone kick 3 rails at the 2 ball, having to avoid the 4 and 5 ball in it's path, and cut that 2 ball one diamond up the rail into the pocket. That was a lot more exciting than any jump shot has EVER been!!

Yeah that sounds like a great shot!! I really like Zulgan's choice of not allowing jump cues.

Maybe somebody should tell Liz Ford they aren't allowed because I watched her use a jump cue on the stream table!! She was playing Chris Bateman and he didn't call her on it. I know Mike holds a player meeting before each tournament and goes over the rules. Maybe he lifted the jump cue ban?? Anybody know what the ruling is because as far as I know Mike doesn't allow jumpers in any of his events....
 
Jump cues are horrible. I played a 2 in a tournament the could jump because those are so easy to use. I believe if you can't use a full cue to jump with, then kick. Look at how close some people can jump from. There is the whole toothpick jump that Nevel and some others can play. Sorry, but putting a cue ball almost up against a ball should be good enough. They allow even the worst of player get over a ball. Ban EM. Just my .02.
 
The ruling for jump shots can be made real simple. If you have to make a jump shot...it HAS to be made with the CUE you shot with LAST!...REAL SIMPLE! That's how I ran my added money tournaments!!!

Glen
 
So they do. But that resolves completely the controversy of defining a jump cue.

From what I remember seeing those matches, I didn't see anyone jumping with their playing cue at all. If they had used their jump shot, they were resorting to kick shots.

You were trying to imply that it's impossible or difficult to disallow jumping or jump cues because of the ambiguity, which is a false implication. The rules are not an issue. Whether or not it should be banned is of course open to discussion.

No. I know that tournament directors make whatever rules they want to whenever they want to which is one of the reasons pool can't get anywhere.

All I said is that the jump SHOT should be banned because it's easy to engineer a "full" cue to be quite good for jumping and playing. Not as good as a dedicated jumper but way better than a "normal" cue.

The point I was making is that technically there is no cue in the rules called a jump cue. But who cares about the rules anyway since everyone just makes their own?
 
Well if we are going to look towards socioeconomic motivations you have to consider that the reason we are at the state we are is through innovation. The drive to make things "better" and easier is what makes us human. The lion doesn't build a fence to trap his prey, he simply lays in wait and tries to surprise it. Humans don't do that, we build tools, we invent techniques, we improvise and adapt.

People bring up the "changes the game" and "way the game was meant to be" all the time but in fact the game has been evolving for hundreds of years. When the game of nine ball changed to one foul ball in hand the need to hit the lowest numbered ball on your turn became huge because giving up ball in hand meant loss of the game more than 50% of the time and probably closer to 90% against a pro.

That single rule changed the way the game was played.

The jump cue is the tool we invented to adapt to the rule change. And the way jump cues are made today are a direct result of competition to engineer the best solution which conforms to the rules and does not damage the equipment.

The argument has been put forth that jump cues were invented by manufacturers looking to sell more equipment. Kind of like how Hallmark cards invented Valentines day. I haven't seen this to be true. The evolution I witnessed from the late 80s onward is that jump cues were tinkered with by small cue makers and the idea was picked up by larger cue makers but the really good ones came through constant revision.

The fact of it is that modern jump cues have been part of the game for about 16 years now. The game is doing fine with them. Some of the greatest shots ever played have been jump shots in high pressure matches in difficult situations.

I agree that jump cues change the game but I think it's for the better. I could live without them but then I'd like to see the rules tweaked so that safeties must be called in all rotation games and the incoming player is not rewarded handsomely due to bad play on the part of the outgoing player. Because this is exactly what happens when a ball is missed and a lucky safe is the result.

I don't think that there is much more evolution to be had here. We have pretty much played out this particular aspect of the game and the equipment is about as good as it's going to get I think. At the end of the day the cue is inert and while it ALLOWS for the shot to be made it does not actually take the shot. The player does that and it's the player that makes the cue ball do whatever it does. My comparison is Mike Massey. No matter how many times Mike Massey has tried to teach me his circular draw shot I just can't get it down like he does it. I have used HIS cue so it's not the cue. He has used my cue so it's not the cue.

The skill resides in him and for me to get close I would have to practice as much as him and be as dedicated to the shot as he is. No one can give me a cue that will make this shot for me. You can give me a cue that draws better somehow but I will still be inconsistent with it. And if you did give me that super draw cue the result would be that Mike Massey would take it from me and invent 20 more shots that I couldn't do.

I want to first start off by saying thank you. This is one of the most intelligent posts I've ever seen on azbilliards that I didn't agree with. Seriously, if this were a debate, I'd throw in the towel. You make some excellent points. The progression of 9ball over the years has pretty much warranted the jump cue. However, I'm still a one-cue-guy. I just believe you should only use one cue during a game, just like the game was played 50 years ago, even 20 years ago. I would sooner agree to having the rules of 9ball completely changed than continue seeing the jump cue.
 
I completely agree - instead of allowing 2, 3 or even more cues, you can only play with 1. The only change would be a tip coming off, broken ferrule,
cracked shaft, etc. and then only the shaft could be changed.

I want to first start off by saying thank you. This is one of the most intelligent posts I've ever seen on azbilliards that I didn't agree with. Seriously, if this were a debate, I'd throw in the towel. You make some excellent points. The progression of 9ball over the years has pretty much warranted the jump cue. However, I'm still a one-cue-guy. I just believe you should only use one cue during a game, just like the game was played 50 years ago, even 20 years ago. I would sooner agree to having the rules of 9ball completely changed than continue seeing the jump cue.
 
It is a slippery slope. Hard to define jump shot. I have seen Janet Atwell practicing shots, similar to a break, where she actually clears up to 3/4ths of the ball in the path of the OB with her standard cue. She isn't bad with a standard jump cue either.

Most people on a hard break clear about 1/3rd of the distance to the HB in the air. So, is a break a form of jump shot??

Ken
 
It is a slippery slope. Hard to define jump shot. I have seen Janet Atwell practicing shots, similar to a break, where she actually clears up to 3/4ths of the ball in the path of the OB with her standard cue. She isn't bad with a standard jump cue either.

Most people on a hard break clear about 1/3rd of the distance to the HB in the air. So, is a break a form of jump shot??

Ken

Yes, almost every shot is a jump shot in the the cue-ball leaves the surface of the table. Next time you are at a table, place a dime directly at the base of the front of the cue-ball and you'll be amazed at how easy it is to clear...
 
IMHO if anyone don't like a rule it should be changed, if anyone don't like ball color they should be changed, if anyone don't like an AZB Member the should be banned, if anyone don't like the Moderator they should be banned.

Pretty soon we will have nothing to talk about because everyone, and every subject will be banned.

Wow that sort of made sense......

maybe cows can fly
 
The point I was making is that technically there is no cue in the rules called a jump cue. But who cares about the rules anyway since everyone just makes their own?

I agree.

But I don't think it's a problem.

If for some reason jump cues would be banned, which I don't see ever happening, we could come up with rules that effectively ban jump cues without defining them precisely. That's not the problem.

I do agree that they aren't going anywhere in the foreseeable future. But I don't think that means we couldn't discuss the issue.
 
Back
Top