Yapp’s Controversial Tournament-Winning Shot in the 8-Ball World Championship … Was it a Foul?

[Bob Jewett]

... What was the bizarre rule?

Curiously enough, it was that if you could not actually see the tip hit the ball a second time, you could not call a double hit. Physics be damned. And that's the rule I used. Richie Florence was the victim of one of the most obvious double hits one could hope to see, except it was too fast to see, of course. What I said was, "39", which was the ball count. The shooter said, "You made a good call." Ritchie was irritated.

 

[GideonF]

She, and it looked like a brain fart. You know there are sharks everywhere.

The “he” in my sentence (that Yapp was in the road and he couldn’t see the shot) was FSR. FSR couldn’t see the hit - the ref could see the hit but just blew it.

 

[straightline]

The “he” in my sentence (that Yapp was in the road and he couldn’t see the shot) was FSR. FSR couldn’t see the hit - the ref could see the hit but just blew it.

Ok. Miner badden. He did crane for a look like it mattered to him. Let it go obviously. Maybe he's turning into Hunter Lombardo Speaking of Hunter Lombardo, if he had ferocity, he'd be ferocious.

Propeller head thinks maybe ref was waiting for the 8 to stop short and she got hypnotixed in the moment. 'Course speculation always goes way past collusion...

 

[maha]

Curiously enough, it was that if you could not actually see the tip hit the ball a second time, you could not call a double hit. Physics be damned. And that's the rule I used. Richie Florence was the victim of one of the most obvious double hits one could hope to see, except it was too fast to see, of course. What I said was, "39", which was the ball count. The shooter said, "You made a good call." Ritchie was irritated.

worked that way for decades and was fair as it applied to both sides. the ref calls it as he sees it.

if you want to put physics in it to get always the perfect absolute call, then you need to add cameras.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... if you want to put physics in it to get always the perfect absolute call, then you need to add cameras.

Most physics-based calls don't require cameras; they just require understanding.

There are some calls that require cameras to get right, but the "benefit of the doubt" clause can take care of those at the expense of a few uncalled fouls. I think cameras should be used wherever possible.

 

[maha]

do you really want refs to make calls on what they think the physics is of the shot or the aftermath of it?

what if balls are close and you get a legit force follow and the ref says the physics say your ball cant go that far forward so its a foul.
or many other situations. your understanding and his may be entirely different.

how about a ref. on a seesaw two guys equal weight one is sitting on it and another gets on and it goes up. wouldn't he rule that the guy who just got on is heavier?

two guys have a contest to see who can suck more water up a long tube. at 34 feet they both cant suck up any more. so the ref rules its a tie as they are exactly equal in sucking power.

how much physics are a normal pool ref. supposed to know or be able to understand.

 

[Kris_b1104]

9 pages of this is wild.

 

[maha]

https://www.eetimes.com/the-laws-of-physics-in-billiards/

here is a simple understanding of some billiards physics any ref. should at least be required to understand. at a starting point for them.

do you think its hard to find a ref now that is any good,

 

[mareh]

Why even heve referees. Let the players battle it out. The last man standing....