I recall Texas Ex rules only required shooting down on the ball but these days frozen balls are a single object as long as you hit the CB only, it's ok; even in most leagues.
2002 US Open - Deuel vs Strickland Foul?
- Thread starter Samiel
- Start date
The rules at that time regarding frozen or near-frozen balls were changing, and every TD and player had their own version. That's why Cardone said before the shot: "this is such a clouded area in pool, in the United States"
I had the opposite happen to me. I was playing a guy in about 2010 $100 per game backpocket. He had come up in the 80's and had taken a couple decades off and recently gotten the bug again. He had a shot with about 1/8" between the CB and OB. I forgot if he jacked up or not, but the CB went forward a foot or more. Clearly a foul by the modern rule set. I called foul on him. He looked at me funny. We had a discussions about it for a good 10 minutes, setting up the shot again with 2 other balls, etc. He kept saying it wasn't a foul, I kept saying it was (including on the reset shot for demo purposes). Finally a guy on the rail who we were both buddies with, but also came up in the 80's, and never took time off, gave his input. (we both asked him). He said in the 80's it was a good hit, but today it was a foul because the rules and understanding of the game between the two times evolved.
I gave him the good hit, he won the game from there which put us even, and I quit. I wasn't mad, it was just we were each playing different era rules.
i learned it the old way and even though i have read the rule, watched drdave's video (and understood it), i still instinctively think "foul", lol
Send this video to one of your local head referees, let us know their responses.
They will say the same thing because they know what they are doing. No foul.
Corey was playing Earl for God's sake. Of all the pool players or even humans on the planet that would say something if was even debatable as a foul, it would be Earl, and he didn't say anything.
Which ref did you touch base with that said ''the same thing''?
Billy Incardonas comments hold some water.
In this instance they hold no water. Earl said nothing. Scott the shot said it was legal. Everyone in this thread says it was legal except you.
OK.... But Cardone did say ''looks like a foul to me''.
And what was strange, the ref was in the background.
Billy Incardona knows what he's talking about.
I'm sure he know more than the IOS.
I just know that to get a cue ball to go forward 3-4 feet and have back spin engage is not possible with a stab quick in/out stroke/poke.
You have to have ''follow thru'' involved.
Last edited:
Foul.
Corey hit down behind the angled equator of CB and thus had draw on CB. But CB went forward indicating double hit.
Corey hit down behind the angled equator of CB and thus had draw on CB. But CB went forward indicating double hit.
Were the balls frozen?
In 1989
10+ years earlier (1989) he* didn't think so! These balls aren't frozen and nobody bats an eye:
(18:35)
* and Buddy and Grady and Sigel and Varner
10+ years earlier (1989) he* didn't think so! These balls aren't frozen and nobody bats an eye:
(18:35)
* and Buddy and Grady and Sigel and Varner
Yes
No one is arguing there was no follow thru. But in this case that doesnt indicate a foul. If the balls were frozen, the shot is legal. If they were apart, it's a foul.
Earl/vs Corey.... OP
After the fact, B.I. talked allot more about that shot is all.
It was a good hit/ball contact draw that Corey hit.
Why did you mention Sigel?
Because Billy called that one wrong too in that match. The balls weren't frozen. Sigel follows thru and double hits.
That’s why we have the “written rules” explicitly covering frozen balls.
Idk what the written rule situation was in the 80’s, that’s before my time.
The physics have never changed, of course. Frozen balls act as one ball, regardless of what stroke or elevation is used (except for a soft deliberate “push” stroke). It’s never a foul.
Non frozen balls with a small gab where the cb goes forward is a foul, also regardless if it was jacked up a mile, and regardless if the cb drew back after initially going forward.
I think the education on this until the early 2000’s was not widely accepted/believed/distributed.
Idk what the written rule situation was in the 80’s, that’s before my time.
The physics have never changed, of course. Frozen balls act as one ball, regardless of what stroke or elevation is used (except for a soft deliberate “push” stroke). It’s never a foul.
Non frozen balls with a small gab where the cb goes forward is a foul, also regardless if it was jacked up a mile, and regardless if the cb drew back after initially going forward.
I think the education on this until the early 2000’s was not widely accepted/believed/distributed.
Oh, it's just because I never mentioned Mike in the OP.... hell change the thread, then lets talk about Howard Vickery.
Interesting to see someone use WPA and legit in the same sentence.
Also interesting that other world bodies are starting to get on the same page.
At least communicate.