Post 34 edited with some apology to Fran...
Do You Have the Right to Inspect My Rack?
- Thread starter Jerry Forsyth
- Start date
What Petey said. Use racking templates.
Sent from my Galaxy S4
Sent from my Galaxy S4
Some apologies? Never heard that one before.
Rules and regulations are not meant to cover every single possible scenario. They offer a guideline for players and officials to act in a consistent and logical manner with the basic rules. It's not a stretch to use the same logic when addressing other types of illegal racking issues as well. In fact, it makes perfect sense to use the same logic.
Last edited:
Your long response did not help Jerry either. BCA is not universal and US Open has it`s own rules.
This should put an end to the question
1-14 Racking Procedures
1. You must rack for yourself when you are breaking.
2. You must rack the balls as tightly as possible. Each ball should touch all balls
adjacent to it. (AR p. 78)
3. After you rack the balls, your opponent may inspect the rack but must not touch any
ball. If your opponent is not satisfied with the rack, they may require you to re-rack the
balls one time. After one re-rack, if both players cannot agree that the rack is suitable for
play a referee must be called. The referee will then rack the balls for that game.
4. You should refrain from tapping balls unless necessary. It is preferable to brush the
area of the rack and ensure that the spot attached to the cloth, if any, is in good condition.
5. If the arrangement of the rack does not meet the requirements of the specific game, it
will be corrected without penalty. If your opponent's rack does not meet the requirements
and you do not notify them before they break, the game will continue with no penalty.
1-14 Racking Procedures
1. You must rack for yourself when you are breaking.
2. You must rack the balls as tightly as possible. Each ball should touch all balls
adjacent to it. (AR p. 78)
3. After you rack the balls, your opponent may inspect the rack but must not touch any
ball. If your opponent is not satisfied with the rack, they may require you to re-rack the
balls one time. After one re-rack, if both players cannot agree that the rack is suitable for
play a referee must be called. The referee will then rack the balls for that game.
4. You should refrain from tapping balls unless necessary. It is preferable to brush the
area of the rack and ensure that the spot attached to the cloth, if any, is in good condition.
5. If the arrangement of the rack does not meet the requirements of the specific game, it
will be corrected without penalty. If your opponent's rack does not meet the requirements
and you do not notify them before they break, the game will continue with no penalty.
Says who? I strongly suggest you never pick up a USGA/R&A book. Your head would explode if that's how you think. However, if you want an example of rules done right, then you should carefully study the 700+ pages of the rules/decisions.
Perfect sense to you. Some other perfect sense to another person. And some other perfect sense to someone else. That's the human factor that is necessarily present when rules are not written in a comprehensive manner. And that is why, under WSR, a player cannot count on the exact same consecutive situations being ruled on by two consecutive referee/TD's in the same manner. I've experienced it first hand on more than one occasion.
If that's the way you want a rule set to be, power to you. As both a player and official, I'll take every possible situation I can imagine addressed specifically in the rules, thank you.
Especially as a player. Too many officials forget that it's about the player. If it's not addressed in black and white AND freely available to every player, then it's an epic fail.
Please post a link (other than http://www.usopen9ballchampionships.com/players.php, which does not help) or state where you are getting your information.
These are BCAPL rules, used in CSI events. They do not apply at the Open.
Last edited:
i have known a lot of champions who never checked the opponents racks and it hasnt kept them from winning one bit, its more of a head game then anything, i am with old Keith McCready throw those things up there close and lets play,if you decide to rack me i will rack you too and neither one of us will make balls on the break. i say use the magic racks,like the Chinese do,what the hell,it works and nobody wants to use it, i think they all are cry-babies and want to have an excuse for why they lost. Man up yall and use a magic rack or quit crying. People say well you make too many balls with a magic rack,well play 10 ball then, or respot all the balls made, wouldnt that be fun...lol
Without umpires, referees, officials etc all of these sports would get as silly
What would happen if boxing had no referees? What about NBA basketball, or Pro Baseball without umpires and officials? ....hockey??......football????
Without umpires, referees, officials etc all of these sports would get as silly and unrespected as pool has become. I NEVER played in an ESPN Event that I had to rack my own balls and I played in 23 of them over the years.
Professional Players SHOULD NOT rack the balls or referee their own matches......this would solve the problem, but "some" people don't want this .....go figure. :shrug:
What would happen if boxing had no referees? What about NBA basketball, or Pro Baseball without umpires and officials? ....hockey??......football????
Without umpires, referees, officials etc all of these sports would get as silly and unrespected as pool has become. I NEVER played in an ESPN Event that I had to rack my own balls and I played in 23 of them over the years.
Professional Players SHOULD NOT rack the balls or referee their own matches......this would solve the problem, but "some" people don't want this .....go figure. :shrug:
I think the thread was referring to players racking for themselves. If you let me rack for myself and you have no interest in checking, I will have the corner ball going like every time.
How to make the Corner Ball DEAD...First Lesson #101
Yes, all you have to do is "press" the second two balls in the rack (at the top, not by the 1 ball), and the "chain reaction" makes the first two split and that causes {one of} the corner balls to be dead. There's a couple other ways, but this is one of the most popular ones.....it's really easy with a "magical rack"...I mean magic rack:bash:
'The Rack is the Teacher'
Yes, all you have to do is "press" the second two balls in the rack (at the top, not by the 1 ball), and the "chain reaction" makes the first two split and that causes {one of} the corner balls to be dead. There's a couple other ways, but this is one of the most popular ones.....it's really easy with a "magical rack"...I mean magic rack:bash:
'The Rack is the Teacher'
I had one pro player give me an odd perspective. He said: "Whenever I see someone touching the balls, it raises my suspicion. I don't care if it is a player or a referee no matter what kind of rack is used. When someone touches the balls, it either helps or hurts the breaker. It does not matter if it is intentional or not." At first, this sounds a bit paranoid. After thinking about it, I get where he is coming from.
Jerry, to answer your question: The tournament director sets the rules prior to start. He can set rules as he goes and he can also change the rules midstream. I have seen and heard of that. The rules to be played by are his call.
Jerry, to answer your question: The tournament director sets the rules prior to start. He can set rules as he goes and he can also change the rules midstream. I have seen and heard of that. The rules to be played by are his call.
Last edited:
How about the balls are put into a bag and dumped on the table from random spots and the shooter has to take the table as it lays with no push allowed?
or alllow a push.
Anyway the opening layout would be called the Dump. The referree would make the dump and the incoming player would take the dump.
Or have them break the full rack and then remove the 10-15 from the table.
But overall in a professional event the player should not have to rack at all.
or alllow a push.
Anyway the opening layout would be called the Dump. The referree would make the dump and the incoming player would take the dump.
Or have them break the full rack and then remove the 10-15 from the table.
But overall in a professional event the player should not have to rack at all.
This goes back to an age-old debate on these forums that basically boils down to:
"Who has the right to call and enforce fouls"?
Chris Banks (RIP) started probably the largest and most inflammable thread on it.
We know who can commit fouls.
We know who can (at their discretion?) CALL fouls.
But we don't know who, other than the ref, is obligated to enforce fouls.
Some people see this as a loophole that allows them to commit fouls without breaking the rules.
I can commit a foul (tapping the cue ball). The rules don't explicitly say I must call it,
and they don't say I must enforce it by picking up that cueball and handing it over.
This rack debate is the same thing.
I can commit a foul by violating the rule that says "the balls must be racked as tightly as possible."
But nothing explicitly says it's my job to call it on myself.
And nothing explicitly says my opponent is allowed to enforce the rule by demanding a rerack.
However, honest players who are going by the spirit of the law, rather than the letter of the law,
will have no problem coming up with a sensible interpretation.
"Who has the right to call and enforce fouls"?
Chris Banks (RIP) started probably the largest and most inflammable thread on it.
We know who can commit fouls.
We know who can (at their discretion?) CALL fouls.
But we don't know who, other than the ref, is obligated to enforce fouls.
Some people see this as a loophole that allows them to commit fouls without breaking the rules.
I can commit a foul (tapping the cue ball). The rules don't explicitly say I must call it,
and they don't say I must enforce it by picking up that cueball and handing it over.
This rack debate is the same thing.
I can commit a foul by violating the rule that says "the balls must be racked as tightly as possible."
But nothing explicitly says it's my job to call it on myself.
And nothing explicitly says my opponent is allowed to enforce the rule by demanding a rerack.
However, honest players who are going by the spirit of the law, rather than the letter of the law,
will have no problem coming up with a sensible interpretation.
I may be a bit late 
Only now I have read this thread.
Seems all of you forgot about one thing that answers Jerry's main question and it is, in fact covered by the WSR: Regulation 5. Playing with an “Area” Referee
It may be that a tournament is being played with “area” referees who are each responsible for several tables and there is no referee constantly at each table. In this case, the players are still expected to observe all the rules of the game. The recommended way to conduct play in this situation is as follows.
The non-shooting player will perform all of the duties of the referee. If, prior to a particular shot, the shooting player feels that his opponent will not be able to properly judge the shot, he should ask the area referee to watch the shot. The non-shooting player may also ask for such attention if he feels that he is unable or is unwilling to rule on the shot. Either player has the power to suspend play until he is satisfied with the way the match is being refereed. (...)
Hope this helps
Only now I have read this thread.
Seems all of you forgot about one thing that answers Jerry's main question and it is, in fact covered by the WSR: Regulation 5. Playing with an “Area” Referee
It may be that a tournament is being played with “area” referees who are each responsible for several tables and there is no referee constantly at each table. In this case, the players are still expected to observe all the rules of the game. The recommended way to conduct play in this situation is as follows.
The non-shooting player will perform all of the duties of the referee. If, prior to a particular shot, the shooting player feels that his opponent will not be able to properly judge the shot, he should ask the area referee to watch the shot. The non-shooting player may also ask for such attention if he feels that he is unable or is unwilling to rule on the shot. Either player has the power to suspend play until he is satisfied with the way the match is being refereed. (...)
Hope this helps
Last edited:
Shane would still win, but the matches would be much more interesting to watch
There's a "dead corner ball" every time. Using a mandatory push out after the break and 'Two Shot Shoot Out' rules would eliminate all this controversy AND the best player would win vertially every time.
Shane would still win, and the matches would be much more interesting to watch because we could see how good he really is. imho
There's a "dead corner ball" every time. Using a mandatory push out after the break and 'Two Shot Shoot Out' rules would eliminate all this controversy AND the best player would win vertially every time.
Shane would still win, and the matches would be much more interesting to watch because we could see how good he really is. imho
Okay, magic rack with 9 on the spot. Is there still a dead ball?
I like this solution.
Really, there's a dead corner ball every time without the magic rack, players just don't want to spend
25 minutes making every single ball touch without a molecule of air anywhere.
With the cut break and 9 on the spot, you not only make the wing ball tougher,
you often make the 1 in the side (accidentally or not) which means your next shot on the 2 is a crapshoot.
Which I guess is the goal if people don't like predictable outcomes after every break.