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

[JohnnyOzone]

I have neither met nor played with Aloysius. I accept that he’s an honourable players and was waiting for the ref’s call.

However, I find it hard to believe he didn’t know he fouled. If most informed amateurs believed he fouled, I think he knows as much as they do and also believed he hit the 4 first.

That said, I do believe he felt that it was up to the referee and the referee called it good so he accepted the referee’s decision.

I agree, as a player you have to go with a Ref's call, but a big-time tournament should have Refs who have a clue what they're doing

 

[Cuebuddy]

If the Ref sees the CB going off the tangent line of the 8 ball last, then they ARE calling what they see. Referees should have the highest level of knowledge of anyone when it comes to knowing how to tell a good hit from a bad one. In your theory, all Yapp had to do was hit the balls 100 miles an hour, then nobody could "see" which ball was hit first (or last)

At first I thought that also.
But the spin induced throw would not have grabbed.
Hell, Yapp had enough side spin on that even after contacting the 4 first the 8 still found the pocket!

 

[Baby Huey]

I think a self called foul was in order. Doing that would go a long ways to encouraging other pro's to display good sportsmanship. Frankly its what's needed in our game to set the standard high such that other players might pick up and embelish the same.

 

[straightline]

What was the score? 12 - 4? If there's no ill will, Yapp could pay Ruiz a set, smooth it out.

 

[GideonF]

What was the score? 12 - 4? If there's no ill will, Yapp could pay Ruiz a set, smooth it out.

It was 9-4 at the time of the incident. Should have then been 9-5 with FSR breaking.

 

[straightline]

It was 9-4 at the time of the incident. Should have then been 9-5 with FSR breaking.

Very unenviable situation for both of them. Yapp on a major roll, Ruiz on the big roll off. You know whose game it is now...

 

[Island Drive]

FYI, I just posted a new video with a thorough analysis of the call on the final shot in the 2026 8-Ball World Championship. The shot was taken by Aloysius Yapp against Francisco Sanchez Ruiz (FSR). The shot, which was called good, gave Yapp the title and $90,000. Conclusive proof the shot was a foul is provided along with advice on how to judge wrong-ball-first shots like this accurately. Check it out:

Contents:

• 0:00 - Intro
• 0:42 - The Shot
• 3:25 - Background
• 5:34 - Shot Analysis
• 8:47 - Examples
• 11:12 - Recommendations
• 13:39 - Wrap-Up

Supporting Resources:

• wrong-ball-first fouls and how to judge them:
• rule resource page
• fouls resource page
• example bad and interesting call is past pro tournament matches
• WPA rules update video
• video of entire match
• link to final shot in the video

As always, I look forward to your feedback, comments, questions, complaints, and requests.

Enjoy!

Watching the hit and nothing more than the video shot, the first ball contact Always creates cue ball direction, he hit the four first/foul.

 

[dr_dave]

Watching the hit and nothing more than the video shot, the first ball contact Always creates cue ball direction, he hit the four first/foul.

Agreed. The video provides conclusive proof of this fact.

 

[dr_dave]

Two things I disagree with, you said if you were FSR you would be challenging the call, but his view of the table was blocked by Yapp who was directly infront of him as he played the shot so realistically FSR didn't know what happened so was never going to say anything. Wonder what he thinks of it now.

Let me revise my statement. If I were FSR, I would have made sure I was able to see the shot because it was obvious it was going to be a close call. And when I saw how the CB reacted, indicating an obvious foul, I would have challenged the non-call.

And you think the ref should have taken longer, but someone announced over the tannoy that Yapp was champion almost as soon as the black went in, so that opportunity was taken out of her hands. I feel like the person on the tannoy is partially responsible for it not to have been properly reviewed, pretty hard to roll back a decision after you've publicly announced the champion.

That is unfortunate, and I know it is asking a lot for the ref to be assertive in a situation like this, but that is their job (to make sure the right call is made, despite other circumstances).

 

[dr_dave]

[Cross-post from other thread - simulation seems to match Dr. Dave's analysis, which is expected IMO]

FWIW, I asked ChatGPT to create a physics-based analysis and statistical model (including actual physical parameters as well as information gleaned from Dr. Dave), then run Monte Carlo simulations on extreme right spin shots and then to plot the results of
1) hitting 4 first and
2) hitting 8 first.

I had it run 250,000 attempts and show the results on an overhead of the actual [real world] table. These tests resulted in resting cue ball locations that had no overlap between 8-ball-first and 4-ball-first shots (as would be expected). The estimated end location of the actual shot aligns with a 4-first hit. I then had it run a second simulation at 25% higher speed (10,000 attempts) to show a broader plot.

Below are the graphs and here is ChatGPT's answer: Under standard WPA rules, such contact would constitute a foul. However, absent clear real-time evidence, the original ruling remains valid.

[edit: the object balls are so close, and are separately approximately by the diameter of a ball. Super close hit. The line of centers [arguably] supports that the cue ball path will almost exclusively be because of natural roll after contact. The cue ball contacts the 2nd ball (whatever that is) almost immediately and would lose almost all movement along the tangent line. The resulting location is largely a result roll.

-td

View attachment 897396


View attachment 897397

View attachment 897398

Thank you for sharing that. Awesome job.

 

[dr_dave]

Yapp knew it was a foul. So for me, he is just a piece of shit.
Not a way to win WC.

I think he suspected it could have been a foul, but I don't think he was sure it was a foul. If he was sure, I suspect he would have called a foul or asked for a review. Regardless, all of this is the job of the ref, not the player.

 

[jasonlaus]

It's easy for everybody on here because they are given the answer. My bet is that the average FR on here is probably 500 or so, maybe lower

 

[dr_dave]

Yes, but they are not learning from their mistakes., so I'm a lot more concerned about it than you.

By every reckoning, the Capito foul that (possibly) cost Lechner a spot in the 2025 Hanoi Open semifinals should have given rise to remedial action by WPA to train referees. The most incredible thing about the Capito call at the Hanoi Open, among the worst calls I've seen in my fifty years around pro pool, is that AFTER a video review by the head referee, the incredibly embarrassing call was upheld by the head referee. The message was clear. Referees lack some of the knowledge to do their job as well as they might.

Similarly, when WAXGATE happened at the 2025 WPC, it was obvious to numerous players that some were doctoring the cue ball, not only observing it, but because the cue ball was, far too often, "behaving" in a manner deemed near impossible and irreconcilable with all their experience. I firmly believe that the referees noticed it, too but, if so, they opted not to enforce a rule that WPA noted, in a press release that same week, fell under "unsportsmanslike conduct" rules long on the books. If the refs did not notice it, there is, once again, a problem with referees not showing up to matches with the right knowledge.

I'm fine with referees making some errors in observation or judgment from time to time, for they are only human. They will fail to notice or even misjudge the occasional shirt foul, double hit. or ever-so-slight movement of an object ball, and that's unfortunate but to be expected.

I'm not fine with referees showing up to work without the knowledge needed to do their jobs effectively and, in my opinion, for the third time in the past year, referee ineffectiveness reared its ugly head in major championship play.

Well stated. I agree 100% with your points. For those interested, the other "situations" you mention are covered in detail here:

And here's another recent bad call you should have mentioned:

 

[Island Drive]

Let me revise my statement. If I were FSR, I would have made sure I was able to see the shot because it was obvious it was going to be a close call. And when I saw how the CB reacted, indicating an obvious foul, I would have challenged the non-call.



That is unfortunate, and I know it is asking a lot for the ref to be assertive in a situation like this, but that is their job (to make sure the right call is made, despite other circumstances).

If I'm an opponent in this situation, I will always stop play and call for a ref.
At the ISPA annual event in Davenport IA last week, I was called over at least a dozen times by league players to watch close hits of this type.
Only saw one bad hit over five days, and quite a few changed their shot to make sure it wasn't a foul.

 

[dr_dave]

If I'm an opponent in this situation, I will always stop play and call for a ref.

In case you didn’t notice, a ref was already there.

 

[loggerhead12]

Only saw one bad hit over five days, and quite a few changed their shot to make sure it wasn't a foul.

That's a good point. It's interesting how often plans change when you call for a watch.

It makes me wonder if the same would occur if refs in professional matches informed the player of the foul the ref would be watching for.

 

[Island Drive]

In case you didn’t notice, a ref was already there.

Yeah, but he's not totally ''with it'' in that department obviously.
Be interesting to see how he'd call a split hit .
And in a split decision about a shot or hit, where they Both say they are right, and both say the other is wrong it goes to the shooter.

 

[Baby Huey]

The score in the match is irrelevant. Its either a foul or not.

 

[djg576]

Yeah, but he's not totally ''with it'' in that department obviously.
Be interesting to see how he'd call a split hit .
And in a split decision about a shot or hit, where they Both say they are right, and both say the other is wrong it goes to the shooter.

I think he's a she?

 

[sjm]

And here's another recent bad call you should have mentioned:

I can only mention things I've seen, but this is an even more extreme example of a referee not having the knowledge needed to do the job. Again, occasional errors in observation or judgment are pardonable, but errors that are caused by referees lacking the knowledge to make the calls are not.

Why are referees that lack the core knowledge to do the job being certified by WPA? Why does it seem that referees getting the most noteworthy assignments in pool are the ones making the most errors? Why doesn't WPA care about the precipitous decline in performance of referees in pool?

I think referees have improved at crowd control and in keeping the proceedings smooth. I also think they conduct themselves admirably on a regular basis. In these respects, we have a really good crop of referees in our game. If we can only fill in the gaping holes in their knowledge, they will be the best referees in the history of pro pool. Unfortunately, there is no tangible evidence that filling in these holes has priority with either governing bodies or event producers so, until this changes, it's hard to expect better.