triangle

DynoDan

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
What rulebook/sanctioning organization do you currently consider the most relevant re: 14.1? Back in the day, it was BCA, and I still have an old book that verifies my statement. It makes absolutely no mention of your marking/replacing rule.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
What rulebook/sanctioning organization do you currently consider the most relevant re: 14.1? Back in the day, it was BCA, and I still have an old book that verifies my statement. It makes absolutely no mention of your marking/replacing rule.
I go by the WPA rules which the BCA currently follows. The marked line determines when the ball interferes.

You are right that the old rules simply said, "interferes with the racking of the fourteen balls." What constitutes interference was not defined in the rules. In a previous racking discussion one player said that as long as a ball was not overlapping a ball in the rack, it was not interfering -- just mark it and put it back afterwards. It is not unreasonable to argue that if the ball is so close to the line that you will touch it when placing or removing the rack, the ball is interfering. And then there are the triangles that do not have straight sides and interference depends on which side of the triangle is placed on the table.

The present rules define interference according to the drawn line. It is easy to test with a small block of wood or metal or even a 3x5 card. I have a ball marker that works well for in/out testing.

If you are using a Sardo rack or the table is tapped, you are supposed to draw a line with a normal triangle and use that for in/out.
 

Dan Harriman

One of the best in 14.1
Silver Member
yep

Suppose....

We are playing rack your own. My standard side-of-the-rack break ball is a little low and it looks like I'm barely going to nick the corner of the rack even if I play the shot softly with draw. I move the rack towards the foot rail as far as I can and still leave the back row within the marked outline. With the triangle were using, that happens to be a full inch. I break with stun and smash the balls wide open.

That's the kind of situation I'm talking about and I think it is what Danny was talking about above in the original post.

I think it is blatant cheating to rack like that.

This is correct, the (no referee :-() rack your own format is what I was referring to as well. When there is no referee and triangle is not the same as outlined on table - things can get a bit shady when player racking has a break shot that is either a bit high or low. This makes our great game of 14.1 look bad, Just another sign that we do need referee's. At the top level - if there are no referee's we are poisoning the sport period. Sometimes you see this when players are playing for a couple bucks a game, should never see it in major event in my humble opinion. Ya that is an odd situation indeed, but in the end justice prevails. :-0 AND 'the score ends up being right' for the dude who ain't a cheater. The line drawn in the sand with bca and their hidden phony tape is 'in the rack' and not playable from any standpoint - hmm i have written this before seems it hat got erased? Well there it b again - I think the bca may want to stick to the original outline of Pocket Billiards rather than the term pool. I'm just sayin'.
 
Last edited:

DynoDan

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I don’t get it. Your opponent is the ‘referee’, and racks if you are shooting. If your breakball is close to the rack, then you watch him rack. If you think he is positioning the rack (regardless of what triangle is used) improperly, you inform him of your concern. If you think his decision (which IS final) is incorrect or devious after due consultation, you merely concede the match and pay the stakes. Better to lose ONE bet than to ever again play an opponent of such questionable morals. Couldn’t be simpler.
 

ChrisinNC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
No. That gives too much margin for ball placement. The triangle placement should match the drawn outline as closely as possible.
The only precise way to rack for serious competitive 14.1 play when the outline of the rack being used is not clearly drawn on the cloth, is you must have both vertical and horizontal crosshairs drawn on the cloth through the center of the footspot. The vertical line extends from above the footspot far enough up to make sure the top point of the rack is centered and that line extends all the way below the bottom of the rack in order to properly line up the center back ball when racking. The horizontal crosshair line is drawn through the center of the footspot must extend out beyond both sides of the rack to be able to confirm that head ball is not being racked too high or too low. It is even recommended to have an extra cue ball and place it on the footspot when racking the other 14 balls, to assure the rack is set with both crosshairs going directly through the middle of that head ball, which is then removed after lifting up the rack. In tournament play, some feel that if the break ball and/or cue ball is not located real close to that rack line, a slight variance (racking slightly high or low) may be permitted to try to obtain as tight a rack as possible, but that should certainly be communicated to all players who are playing and racking as to whether or not that will be permitted.
 

Dan Harriman

One of the best in 14.1
Silver Member
keep it between the lines

I never practice without a line drawn for the rack, I never knew how easily a subject can get thrown off course untill I saw some of the responses here. Bottom line is - if your playing rack your own format then you are subject to being cheated in any discipline of pool - unless you know how to protect yourself. Again for those who can't understand or seem to want to over-complicate my point - it is imperative to use the actual triangle that was originally used to trace the rack line in 14.1 or else the rack location can be easily manipulated. This hurts the integrity of the great game of Straight Pool, I will never again compete in an event where the ref's are biased (and or do not fully understand the rules they are 'trying to implement') and or my opponent wants to use a different triangle (than the one originally drawn for the rack line) so as to move the rack either high or low depending on break shot. So again for those who are in remiss of the facts, if your watching a 14.1 match and the players are not using the original rack tht was used to determine spacial relations - the ball's will not be racked the same every time and aqwaurd situations will arise indeed. ssl I just like a level playing field for my cash.

I would add that some day when the 14.1 is promoted properly - there will be technology put in place that keeps the triangle away from spacial deception ie human error. Then the game will be more fun to watch and the cheats will be 'lost in their own space'. adios just an angle that I thought I would try.
 
Last edited:

Dan Harriman

One of the best in 14.1
Silver Member
It is always blatant cheating to rack any other way than to....:
‘Place the head ball space directly over the footspot, lower and pull the triangle (3rd side parallel to the footrail) rearward until contacting the front pair while simultaneously forcing the remaining balls forward until all are touching’. That is the position the triangle is required to be in when the pencil line is drawn.
I think some confusion might exist with indelible lines that remain on tables where their original triangles have gone missing, and been replaced with larger models. Thus my earlier comment re: how a pencil line might not always be considered an official demarcation, but rather merely a guide. The VENERABLE rules of the game are very simple, regardless of what model triangle is available:
IF THE BALLS CANNOT BE RACKED IN THE PROSCRIBED MANNER (see above) BY LOWERING THE TRIANGLE STRAIGHT DOWN WITHOUT DISTURBING THE 15TH BALL......THEN IT GOES ON THE HEADSPOT! It either interferes, or it doesn’t (not complicated)! Any arguing, whining, calling over 3rd parties, or marking/moving the breakball, is demonstrating (IMHO) just as silly a form of behavior as those who constantly argue with the referee in ANY sport, thus revealing their LACK of sportsmanship!

So, I guess this would mean that those who play on all-Diamond equipment had better learn to select their behind-the-rack breakshots closer to the footrail!

Ya I think some confusion might exist there dyno dan, Grateful Dead say's when you get confused - listen to the music. It might be time to listen to the music.
 

DynoDan

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Danny Harriman ....‘Grateful Dead’...[/QUOTE said:
I could never comprehend justification for the extent of their popularity, unless you were in the audience when they were tossing out free ‘Owlsleys’ (?).
 

Dan Harriman

One of the best in 14.1
Silver Member
dazed

I could never comprehend justification for the extent of their popularity, unless you were in the audience when they were tossing out free ‘Owlsleys’ (?).

Don't know bout owlsleys - but you CAN over complicate wit the best of em Dyno duo dan. No worries - 'keep truckin' little brother. I know not much bout the flat earth theory but I do like a level playing field, using a different rack than the one originally drawn or traced will make the white knight start talking backwards. If you cannot understand that it's imperative to use the same rack as the one originally traced then I cannot help you. I am not a pro arguer' either, just trying to help the players who are present to win in an honest format - if that even exist anymore?
 
Last edited:

DynoDan

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Danny Harriman) ...it's imperative to use the same rack as the one originally traced...[/QUOTE said:
So, using your rationale, then if there is a previously drawn indelible line on the cloth, and only a larger than original triangle is available, and the proprietor won’t allow you to draw a second line...., then that table cannot be used to play 14.1?

I think you might find that most who play straight pool are flexible enough to adapt, and will traditionally use ‘triangle interference’ as the deciding factor when determining whether the breakball is indeed in or out.
 

arcstats

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've been seriously playing straight pool for over 5 years and have always questioned why there is not a regulation 14.1 rack to end all this nonsense. Nobody has an answer as to why there is not one.

I understand why it doesn't matter in today's world, because 99% of the players are playing games where there is no connection from one rack to the next. But one would have thought 100 years ago when 14.1 was the only game played some rack standardization would have been instituted.

Rack size variance is obscene today. The Diamond rack is almost 3 2x4's put together (OK I'm exaggerating a bit, but you get the point) and should never be used for 14.1. The depth of that rack actually penalizes a player who wants to play a "behind the rack break" if you are using the edges of that rack to determine whether the break ball is inside the rack.

I think the table should be marked with 3 lines that indicate the actual edge of the 14 balls. If the edge of the break ball is outside that line it stays, even if you need to mark the break ball to rack the balls with whatever rack you use.

Not having a regulation rack for 14.1 is no different than playing with balls other than a 2.25" diameter. When you think about it, it is just another example of how so many rules of pool have gray areas open to interpretation and launch points for cheating.
 

lfigueroa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've been seriously playing straight pool for over 5 years and have always questioned why there is not a regulation 14.1 rack to end all this nonsense. Nobody has an answer as to why there is not one.

I understand why it doesn't matter in today's world, because 99% of the players are playing games where there is no connection from one rack to the next. But one would have thought 100 years ago when 14.1 was the only game played some rack standardization would have been instituted.

Rack size variance is obscene today. The Diamond rack is almost 3 2x4's put together (OK I'm exaggerating a bit, but you get the point) and should never be used for 14.1. The depth of that rack actually penalizes a player who wants to play a "behind the rack break" if you are using the edges of that rack to determine whether the break ball is inside the rack.

I think the table should be marked with 3 lines that indicate the actual edge of the 14 balls. If the edge of the break ball is outside that line it stays, even if you need to mark the break ball to rack the balls with whatever rack you use.

Not having a regulation rack for 14.1 is no different than playing with balls other than a 2.25" diameter. When you think about it, it is just another example of how so many rules of pool have gray areas open to interpretation and launch points for cheating.


lol, true about the Diamond rack.

Certainly it wouldn't hurt to standardize this. Rack size, as in other things in life, can make a big difference :-o

Lou Figueroa
 

Dan Harriman

One of the best in 14.1
Silver Member
So, using your rationale, then if there is a previously drawn indelible line on the cloth, and only a larger than original triangle is available, and the proprietor won’t allow you to draw a second line...., then that table cannot be used to play 14.1?

I think you might find that most who play straight pool are flexible enough to adapt, and will traditionally use ‘triangle interference’ as the deciding factor when determining whether the breakball is indeed in or out.

oh more conjecture, I just put u on me ignore list. Use all the fancy words u like dyno duo, u either don't want to learn or your protecting the source that keeps corruption alive. I have no answers for u.
 

Dan Harriman

One of the best in 14.1
Silver Member
computer graphics

There is no major event worth attending here in USA for 14.1 I am sorry to report. getting back to the possible future of 14.1 (on the square) - I visualize object balls that are inside the rack line - blinking while watching a great match up between two great players from a monitor/TV at the top level. This inevitable technology will replace the dismal state of how Straight Pool is being marketed or presented to the public today. Ya just use any ol' rack - what a racket ha ha. See u in the funny papers.
 

Dan Harriman

One of the best in 14.1
Silver Member
the ol' most people angle

So, using your rationale, then if there is a previously drawn indelible line on the cloth, and only a larger than original triangle is available, and the proprietor won’t allow you to draw a second line...., then that table cannot be used to play 14.1?

I think you might find that most who play straight pool are flexible enough to adapt, and will traditionally use ‘triangle interference’ as the deciding factor when determining whether the breakball is indeed in or out.

oh u might want to know - I care zero for how most people might want to go about playing 14.1, let them hover the foreign rack over a frame of pool ball's and try to guess what is in or out. Most people who have a brain and really want to learn the game will listen to what I am saying. I don't think your in that group, if u ever want lessons on 14.1 come to MO my rate for u is $10,000 per hr - and u can ask all the dumb questions u want.
 

Dan Harriman

One of the best in 14.1
Silver Member
You are correct

I've been seriously playing straight pool for over 5 years and have always questioned why there is not a regulation 14.1 rack to end all this nonsense. Nobody has an answer as to why there is not one.

I understand why it doesn't matter in today's world, because 99% of the players are playing games where there is no connection from one rack to the next. But one would have thought 100 years ago when 14.1 was the only game played some rack standardization would have been instituted.

Rack size variance is obscene today. The Diamond rack is almost 3 2x4's put together (OK I'm exaggerating a bit, but you get the point) and should never be used for 14.1. The depth of that rack actually penalizes a player who wants to play a "behind the rack break" if you are using the edges of that rack to determine whether the break ball is inside the rack.

I think the table should be marked with 3 lines that indicate the actual edge of the 14 balls. If the edge of the break ball is outside that line it stays, even if you need to mark the break ball to rack the balls with whatever rack you use.

Not having a regulation rack for 14.1 is no different than playing with balls other than a 2.25" diameter. When you think about it, it is just another example of how so many rules of pool have gray areas open to interpretation and launch points for cheating.

We have a winner, give em a cigar. thanks for an honest and well thought out post.
 

Saturated Fats

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Nice idea, but how do you do that?

I think the table should be marked with 3 lines that indicate the actual edge of the 14 balls.

I agree with the intent, but that can't be done using any normal triangle rack because the inside of the triangle is larger than "the actual edge of the 14 balls."
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
...
I think the table should be marked with 3 lines that indicate the actual edge of the 14 balls. If the edge of the break ball is outside that line it stays, even if you need to mark the break ball to rack the balls with whatever rack you use.

...
There are some spots your idea would allow for a break ball where the break ball would be unplayable. Is that what you want?
 
Top