Roger, in back pocket 9B, that's a good shot IMO; however, as stated in the rules listed above, in banks, that is not a good shot.
Bank pool shot / Is this legal
- Thread starter harleydon1950
- Start date
Roger, in back pocket 9B, that's a good shot IMO; however, as stated in the rules listed above, in banks, that is not a good shot.
Yeah, the tit alters the angle. Not good. Call pocket would change that.
You guys are having entirely too much fun Nick!!!
Maybe you've never played bank pool before? I've never heard of playing bank pool with calling the pocket only.
That's ambiguous to me. It's the "does the table have 4 or 6 rails" question. Whoever wrote this rule did a bad job, because this question comes up in every single bank pool tournament ever held. Hitting the side pocket tit on a straight back should be explicitly spelled out as good or bad. I bet they don't play banks.
I'm sticking to my guns and saying hitting the tit is good and that the DCC plays it this way.
I even remember some of the player's meetings were broadcast live on the stream at year's past DCC's. I went looking for them on YT to see the answer, but couldn't find them. Now I remember those were all ppv by Accu-stats and wouldn't be on YT.
Cord
Well-known member
I agree, that should probably be explicitly spelled out somewhere. It could be argued that the language, "the two rail sections adjoining the target pocket" implies six.
"Incidental cushion contacts on the two rail sections adjoining the target pocket as the ball enters the pocket are not counted as cushion contacts for or against the shooter."
"The object-ball must not contact uncalled rails except for the incidental contact mentioned above."
This is not clear enough for everyone?
"The object-ball must not contact uncalled rails except for the incidental contact mentioned above."
This is not clear enough for everyone?
Crystal clear to me.
It's also clear to me, but to be fair, "rail section" is not defined in the section in the Rules that describes the parts of a table.
For those who don't find it clear, why would someone have included the word "section" if they meant the entire rail? What does "rail section" mean to you?
The DCC rules page does have a list of exceptions to the WPA rules, such as no jump sticks in one pocket or banks, but they don't discuss "off-the-point" banks.
Cord
Well-known member
Nope, it isn't. Maybe discussions like this illustrate that it ought to be, though. You got any pull with the Rules Committee, Bob?
So, i talked to a friend who said on a straight back the whole rail is considered a dead rail. Thats the way they have always played.
Although we didn't play that way as I remember. Shit it in off any point on that rail is good.
I think its just one of those rules that is played both ways and needs to be discussed before hand.
Although we didn't play that way as I remember. Shit it in off any point on that rail is good.
I think its just one of those rules that is played both ways and needs to be discussed before hand.
Last edited:
It can easily mean the entire rail (both sides of the side pocket). It's very ambiguous.
Really its a piss poor job of writing that rule knowing how often this question comes up.
What if you have a crossover straight back bank where the OB is extremely close to the long rail to start (thus making it a very shallow bank angle of just a few degrees, and the OB actually rubs the long rail well before the side pocket tit, continues traveling past the side pocket, and falls into the designated corner. That's the same as "incidental" contact to me.
Another thing that makes the tit inconsequential is arguments over "which" tit it hit. Straight backs are often at speed, and it would be near impossible to determine if it hit the tit connected to the "cushion" closest to the target corner, or the "cushion" furthest from the target corner.
Didn't anyone here play banks at DCC and go to the player's meeting? Am I at the only one that is remembering them explicitly saying "hitting any side pocket tit is good"?
I never go to the meetings...lol. DCC changes rules every year so its hard to say what they do or change every year. ...lol
I'm not hear to argue or dispute DCC rules. I live in Ky. I play bank pool often. Have for thirty years. I've never seen it called good.
You would have to show me any shallow angle straight back bank that hits "well above the side pocket" and goes in without hitting the side pocket point.
its still is, 6 rails or 4. get that settled. if its 4 rails then hitting that long side rail anywhere along it is good.
if 6 rails on a table then it clearly is not.
other wise suppose you hit your bank 3 inches short of the pocket and still goes in. is that good or not. if it is. is hitting farther up good or even past the side pocket and slopping it in.
some tables may be forgiving enough.
banking or hitting any shot that follows along a rail can make it contact a few times and still go in.
if 6 rails on a table then it clearly is not.
other wise suppose you hit your bank 3 inches short of the pocket and still goes in. is that good or not. if it is. is hitting farther up good or even past the side pocket and slopping it in.
some tables may be forgiving enough.
banking or hitting any shot that follows along a rail can make it contact a few times and still go in.
I think what makes most people jump up and down about it is that the ball path is significantly altered if it hits the point. The shot had no chance to go until it hit the point, so in their minds it's bad.
It would be nice if the rule was clear, but it's not. And likely never will be, since lots of people have not problem altering or ignoring rules, even if they are clear.
It would be nice if the rule was clear, but it's not. And likely never will be, since lots of people have not problem altering or ignoring rules, even if they are clear.
A old time banks pro I know told me the way they play is the whole long rail is considered a dead rail. So off the point on either side of the pocket is still a good shot. If I was writing a rule on it, out of respect I would defer to him.