Three fouls and you lose -- at snooker!

Bob Jewett · Mar 2, 2016

It turns out that snooker also has a 3 foul rule. Here's an example https://youtu.be/w9sYcDFY3pg?t=4m20s

What I don't understand is why he didn't change his aim for the 2nd and 3rd attempts. He should have picked a spot on the wall for the first try and adjusted on subsequent tries.

krupa · Mar 2, 2016

Odd rule... if you have a full-ball hit available, then the 3-foul rule comes into play.

http://www.rulesofsnooker.com/understanding-the-three-miss-rule.html

DaveK · Mar 2, 2016

Bob Jewett said:
It turns out that snooker also has a 3 foul rule. Here's an example https://youtu.be/w9sYcDFY3pg?t=4m20s

What I don't understand is why he didn't change his aim for the 2nd and 3rd attempts. He should have picked a spot on the wall for the first try and adjusted on subsequent tries.

The degree of precision in these shots is incredible. I suspect he did adjust his aim/shot, but was still trying to come to rest just under the pink. Ricky is ranked # 11 in the world and likely is quite proficient at all aspects of snooker. Hard to earn over 1M being a banger.

I had to laugh at the comment by someone saying he should have just smashed into the pack and the let Ronnie try to beat him rather than losing by 3 fouls :lol:

Dave

Philthepockets · Mar 2, 2016

technically it's the 3 miss rule not 3 foul

ChicagoJoe · Mar 2, 2016

DaveK said:
The degree of precision in these shots is incredible. I suspect he did adjust his aim/shot, but was still trying to come to rest just under the pink. Ricky is ranked # 11 in the world and likely is quite proficient at all aspects of snooker. Hard to earn over 1M being a banger.

I had to laugh at the comment by someone saying he should have just smashed into the pack and the let Ronnie try to beat him rather than losing by 3 fouls :lol:

Dave

Wouldnt that be better than what he did?

pt109 · Mar 2, 2016

Bob Jewett said:
It turns out that snooker also has a 3 foul rule. Here's an example https://youtu.be/w9sYcDFY3pg?t=4m20s

What I don't understand is why he didn't change his aim for the 2nd and 3rd attempts. He should have picked a spot on the wall for the first try and adjusted on subsequent tries.

It is strange that he would 3-miss here...he had a big target...3 reds clumped together.

It might be the "playing the Rocket" syndrome.

Bella Don't Cry · Mar 2, 2016

Philthepockets said:
technically it's the 3 miss rule not 3 foul

CORRECT! :thumb:

If the player at the table can see a red(s) but fails to hit a red(s) after 3 attempts; the player at the table concedes the frame. It's designed to forced the incoming player to hit a red. If not, he can just miss the reds completely without giving an advantage to the opponent.

This rule will seem strange to a pool player, but makes perfect sense to a Snooker player :thumbup:

acesinc1999 · Mar 2, 2016

krupa said:
Odd rule... if you have a full-ball hit available, then the 3-foul rule comes into play.

http://www.rulesofsnooker.com/understanding-the-three-miss-rule.html

As a snooker player, I resemble that remark. Our rules are straightforward and generally understood by the regular players of the game. By contrast, pool players seem to have a hard time deciding which game to play, let alone which set of rules to play the game under. Evidence the multiple posts where someone asks, "What is the rule if..." and he receives fifteen different responses with twelve different answers.

krupa · Mar 2, 2016

acesinc1999 said:
As a snooker player, I resemble that remark. Our rules are straightforward and generally understood by the regular players of the game. By contrast, pool players seem to have a hard time deciding which game to play, let alone which set of rules to play the game under. Evidence the multiple posts where someone asks, "What is the rule if..." and he receives fifteen different responses with twelve different answers.

Fair enough; we definitely have too many rule variations. As for the number of games, I liken a pool table to a deck of cards. There are a lot of different games you can play and each offers interesting game play options.

I'm sure the snooker rules aren't really difficult. Unfortunately, I have only played snooker a handful of times in my life and I'm sure I didn't play correctly. The rules that come up and confuse me usually revolve around whether or not you can see all or any of the ball, when you can nominate a ball, and what to do when the cue ball is frozen to a ball. But the chances of me playing any snooker (especially on a 12' table) are so slim, please don't take the time to explain them.

pdcue · Mar 2, 2016

acesinc1999 said:
As a snooker player, I resemble that remark. Our rules are straightforward and generally understood by the regular players of the game. By contrast, pool players seem to have a hard time deciding which game to play, let alone which set of rules to play the game under. Evidence the multiple posts where someone asks, "What is the rule if..." and he receives fifteen different responses with twelve different answers.

So, you agree, we are more sophisticated... and complex.

Dale(a simple kind of man)

alstl · Mar 2, 2016

What I find odd about snooker is how the referee approximates the position of the balls prior to the foul.

DaveK · Mar 2, 2016

ChicagoJoe said:
Wouldnt that be better than what he did?

It would have the same result. You leave Ronnie an opening and he wins. And no pro is going to disrespect Ronnie by breaking open a pack essentially saying "I challenge you to beat me".

Dave

DaveK · Mar 2, 2016

alstl said:
What I find odd about snooker is how the referee approximates the position of the balls prior to the foul.

They both anticipate this requirement (to replace the balls), hence the close inspection of the layout (mostly of the cueball position) plus they typically have video replay freeze-frame to help them .... and the pink was on it's spot so that part was easy.

Dave

Bob Jewett · Mar 2, 2016

DaveK said:
They both anticipate this requirement (to replace the balls), hence the close inspection of the layout (mostly of the cueball position) plus they typically have video replay freeze-frame to help them .... and the pink was on it's spot so that part was easy.

Dave

In the linked video if you click between 4:20 and 6:20 or so you can see that the restored position is close but visibly off. I think in that event they did not have the enhanced video support since there were multiple tables in progress. The rule would work with a pretty simple overhead camera if you could easily compare frames.

alphadog · Mar 2, 2016

So does the ref have to issue a warning?
I saw a video where I believe opponent warned of loss?

acesinc1999 · Mar 2, 2016

alphadog said:
So does the ref have to issue a warning?
I saw a video where I believe opponent warned of loss?

Yes, the ref must issue warning for a loss of frame situation. And yes, it recently occurred that the ref was slow to issue warning (hey, they have a lot to keep an eye on) so the opponent reminded him. But ultimately, the ref must say it. If a third miss with full ball on is played but no warning was given, it is not loss of frame but as soon as the ref gets his head out his butt, he will say, "Be warned the NEXT miss will be loss of frame."

acesinc1999 · Mar 2, 2016

krupa said:
Fair enough; we definitely have too many rule variations. As for the number of games, I liken a pool table to a deck of cards. There are a lot of different games you can play and each offers interesting game play options.

I'm sure the snooker rules aren't really difficult. Unfortunately, I have only played snooker a handful of times in my life and I'm sure I didn't play correctly. The rules that come up and confuse me usually revolve around whether or not you can see all or any of the ball, when you can nominate a ball, and what to do when the cue ball is frozen to a ball. But the chances of me playing any snooker (especially on a 12' table) are so slim, please don't take the time to explain them.

I like the deck of cards analogy. Of course, there are also a lot of variations on a snooker table as well but they are all subserviant to THE GAME.

If you ever come through Chicago, I will be happy to spoon feed you more snooker than you could possibly care for.

acesinc1999 · Mar 2, 2016

pdcue said:
So, you agree, we are more sophisticated... and complex.

Dale(a simple kind of man)

Complex? Pool players I have known do tend to make things complex. Sophisticated? I suppose the same way coffee is more sophisticated than tea, or bagels are more sophisticated than croissants. I prefer to say "different" and leave it at that but you can place levels of sophistication as you wish, that is your affair. If you are a "simple kind of man", you must love the Snooker!

asbani · Mar 2, 2016

It's not an odd rule, it's a perfectly designed rule in snooker and it's been for ages, and don't mistake this as a 3 foul rule because it isn't. It goes like this

If you are snookered and can't see a full red then you can foul/miss as much as you want and you wouldn't lose the game/frame, this must be understood.

Then if you can see a full red ball but you figure a different shot, maybe a kick or thinning another red for better safety and you go for it but miss it twice and fouled, then referee will give you a warning that you can see a full red and if you miss/foul again you will concede the frame.

Now in this situation most players shoot the red that they see full and stay in the frame, but the player in the video figured that if he shoot that red he will lose the frame anyway because Ronnie is a great player so he figured to give it another go with his intentional safety and it didn't work.

The rule is beautifully written.

Bella Don't Cry · Mar 3, 2016

asbani said:
It's not an odd rule, it's a perfectly designed rule in snooker and it's been for ages, and don't mistake this as a 3 foul rule because it isn't. It goes like this

If you are snookered and can't see a full red then you can foul/miss as much as you want and you wouldn't lose the game/frame, this must be understood.

Then if you can see a full red ball but you figure a different shot, maybe a kick or thinning another red for better safety and you go for it but miss it twice and fouled, then referee will give you a warning that you can see a full red and if you miss/foul again you will concede the frame.

Now in this situation most players shoot the red that they see full and stay in the frame, but the player in the video figured that if he shoot that red he will lose the frame anyway because Ronnie is a great player so he figured to give it another go with his intentional safety and it didn't work.

The rule is beautifully written.

Nicely described!
I just couldn't be bothered to do it myself :thumbup:

Three fouls and you lose -- at snooker!

AZB Osmium Member

The Dream Operator

Still crazy after all these years

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

WO double hemlock

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

The Dream Operator

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

Still crazy after all these years

Still crazy after all these years

AZB Osmium Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member

AzB Silver Member