Rules: 8-Ball Break -- ambiguous?

rupcha

rupcha

Registered
After playing Pool for about a year now, I have tried to read and understand the WPA rules for the 8-ball break -- and failed.

I drew a little diagram of the rules, which made me at least understand why nobody else seems to completely know the rules (see attachment below).

What happens when you foul, but also do not drive 4 balls to a rail? Does the "illegal break" according to 3.3(d) take precedence over a foul? I.e. opponent has option to let you rebreak or break himself. Or does the foul according to 3.3(g/h) take precedence, giving the opponent the option of taking ball in hand behind the head string?

Does anybody but Bob Jewett even know the answer? ;)

Thanks

Rupert
 

Attachments

  • 8-Ball-Break-III.jpg
    8-Ball-Break-III.jpg
    79 KB · Views: 611
rupcha said:
After playing Pool for about a year now, I have tried to read and understand the WPA rules for the 8-ball break -- and failed.

I drew a little diagram of the rules, which made me at least understand why nobody else seems to completely know the rules (see attachment below).

What happens when you foul, but also do not drive 4 balls to a rail? Does the "illegal break" according to 3.3(d) take precedence over a foul? I.e. opponent has option to let you rebreak or break himself. Or does the foul according to 3.3(g/h) take precedence, giving the opponent the option of taking ball in hand behind the head string?

Does anybody but Bob Jewett even know the answer? ;)

Thanks

Rupert
Click to expand...

I think you got it!
 

Attachments

  • obsess.jpg
    obsess.jpg
    20.4 KB · Views: 534
I think your diagram is wrong.

The first question is not whether or not a foul was committed but whether or not it was a legal break: i.e., was a ball pocketed or 4 balls driven to a rail.

Then you can ask if fouls were committed, was the 8-ball pocketed, anything off the table, etc.
 
krupa said:
I think your diagram is wrong.

The first question is not whether or not a foul was committed but whether or not it was a legal break: i.e., was a ball pocketed or 4 balls driven to a rail.
Click to expand...

Well, that is my question. The only indication that this is so would be that the rule is stated before the foul rules. Are WPA rules meant to be read strictly 'first-match' (meaning, as soon as you find a rule that matches the situation, stop reading)?
 
Bob Jewett said:
Bob doesn't know the answer either. So an example would be if you just nick the rack and the cue ball scratches.
I'd go with the BCAPL rules: [...]
The illegal break has precedence, so the seated player chooses who will break a new rack.
Click to expand...

Thanks. It does make more sense this way, as the other way would be very exploitable.

BTW, do you have any idea why the scratch (unlike any other foul) along with pocketing the eight gets a special treatment (3.3(f))?
 
rupcha said:
... BTW, do you have any idea why the scratch (unlike any other foul) along with pocketing the eight gets a special treatment (3.3(f))?
Click to expand...
Oversight and inattention? I think the rules do not say what to do if the eight ball is pocketed on some other kind of foul. Specifically, they seem to leave the eight ball off the table which makes winning more difficult.

I think 3.3f should probably say "foul" rather than "scratch", but more generally I think the rules for the break need to be seriously simplified. There should be far fewer choices. Sometimes life is unfair.
 
Bob Jewett said:
Bob doesn't know the answer either. So an example would be if you just nick the rack and the cue ball scratches.
I'd go with the BCAPL rules: http://www.playbca.com/portals/0/rules/8Ball.pdf
The illegal break has precedence, so the seated player chooses who will break a new rack.
Click to expand...

Not wanting to be a d*ck nor be argumentative, but I have a problem with this scenario. A break shot, though NOT resulting in a legal break by virtue of not sending the required number of balls to the rails, is still a SHOT. IMO, if a scratch occurs during one of these breaks, the balls should be re-racked and the option of who breaks should be given to the sitting player. I know these aren't the way the rules read, but why/how can someone be rewarded for putting the cueball into a pocket on a SHOT??? Look at this scenario: Two players are hill-hill. Breaker scratches but doesn't send four balls to a rail, gets to re-break and either 1.) breaks-and-runs the rack, or 2.) makes the 8-ball on the break and wins (providing that is the rule in this match).

Does that seem fair/right to you (or anybody else)? A person wins a match right after sending the cueball into a pocket on a shot?

Not to me. Not ever!!!

But, I'm probably in the minority here (as usual) :D.

Maniac
 
Bob Jewett said:
Oversight and inattention? I think the rules do not say what to do if the eight ball is pocketed on some other kind of foul. Specifically, they seem to leave the eight ball off the table which makes winning more difficult.
Click to expand...

I just notice that in assuming the illegal break takes precedence, the rules also do not say what to do with the cue ball in case you choose to accept the table in position. BIH? Behind the head string? Also for non-scratch fouls? Or a choice, as in other fouls?
 
The game has not begun until a legal break has occurred. The balls are re-racked and the cue ball is behind the head string as before. The opposing player has the choice of breaking or making the original player break again.
 
Maniac said:
... A break shot, though NOT resulting in a legal break by virtue of not sending the required number of balls to the rails, is still a SHOT. ...
Click to expand...
At nine ball that is true. If you miscue and hit no ball, your opponent gets ball in hand and is not shooting a break shot.

At eight ball it's different. I think the general idea is to get the rack started normally rather than get into some kind of bizarre set of safety plays. Suppose we play it like nine ball. If the breaker miscues at eight ball and hits nothing and the incoming player chooses to shoot a shot that looks like a break shot to get the game started, the eight ball is "live" and if it goes into a pocket it is loss of game on that shot. I can imagine a pair of 2s taking a half hour to get through an unbroken rack if neither of them chooses to open the rack (or breaks it up inadvertently).
 
Bob Jewett said:
At nine ball that is true. If you miscue and hit no ball, your opponent gets ball in hand and is not shooting a break shot.
Click to expand...

This is a new one on me... it would actually result in some pretty funny conversations.

The other guy miscues. I pick up the cue ball, place it 5 inches from the rack, and try to make a wing ball or some dead carom.

"Dude, what are you doing?!?"

Has anyone seen this in a tournament setting (or otherwise)?
 
ChopStick said:
The game has not begun until a legal break has occurred. The balls are re-racked and the cue ball is behind the head string as before. The opposing player has the choice of breaking or making the original player break again.
Click to expand...

Or he may choose to accept the layout as is and continue play. So a legal break is not a requirement for the game to have begun.
 
CreeDo said:
This is a new one on me... it would actually result in some pretty funny conversations.

The other guy miscues. I pick up the cue ball, place it 5 inches from the rack, and try to make a wing ball or some dead carom.

"Dude, what are you doing?!?"

Has anyone seen this in a tournament setting (or otherwise)?
Click to expand...

Yes. The standard play is to thin the 1 ball and roll to the middle of the foot rail.
 
So in summary, would this updated diagram represent the generally accepted interpretation of the rules?
I.e. illegal break takes precendence over a foul, but "accepting the table in position" after an illegal break actually means revisiting the rules as if it was a legal break?

The reason I am being so anal is that I am preparing a collection of lesser known / poorly understood rules for our local club and I just want to make sure not to spread any false information.

I am not obsessed! ;)

Thanks
 

Attachments

  • 8-Ball-Break-IVb.jpg
    8-Ball-Break-IVb.jpg
    81.2 KB · Views: 106
To be anal about it, I think you need to redo it in a more-standard, one question at a time, flow chart. Here's something to get you started:

flow_charts.png

XKCD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top