Heads up.
The next one to fire a shot in anger is going to get some time off.
Only warning I'll give.
The next one to fire a shot in anger is going to get some time off.
Only warning I'll give.
One Pocket - Intentional Foul Etiquette
- Thread starter BC21
- Start date
Bout' time you got here, you getting old like the rest of us, battery on your wheelchair needed charging or something, I know that rope ain't swinging like it use to by now....:thumbup:
When was that brought up in this thread?
You're mixing the rules here when you make a statement like that. Ball in hand in one pocket or 14.1 is only awarded after the cue ball is either scratched off the table or pocketed. Unlike 8 ball, 9 ball, or 10 ball, the cue ball is awarded to the incoming player as BIH following a foul. In one pocket and 14.1....a point is deducted after a foul, and unless the foul is a scratch....the incoming player does not get BIH to start with, the player accepts the cue ball where it sits. That is where the corner hooking move came from, the offending player corner hooks the cue ball taking a foul and either gives up one point, or spots a ball in one pocket.
That is why I made the statement that after a scratch and the incoming player has BIH in the kitchen, before any other foul can be committed, and penalties awarded, the player must first erase the scratch from the opponent by FIRST entering the cue ball into fair play...by shooting it across the foul line without FIRST committing a foul. After the cue ball crosses the foul line, yes a foul can be committed, but it's a legal foul at that point.
Please define:
1. A "legal" foul, and give an example.
2. An "un-legal" foul and give an example.
Thank,
Dave
Last edited:
OK, 2 balls frozen together behind the foul line, perfect to roll the cue ball up behind and freeze it to the back ball giving your opponent no chance at moving the balls out of the way of your corner pocket, that's an illegal foul because the cue ball never entered into fair play first. Same shot except the 2 frozen balls are across the foul line, rolling the cue ball up to the backside of them and freezing it to the back ball, legal shot but still a foul, so then you'd have to spot a ball for the foul but your opponent has to accept the table and cue ball as is.
Can you give a time when the foul occurs please?
That was a double hit on the cue ball, first contact was when he stroked his cue into the cue ball, second contact was with his follow through stroke pushing the cue ball through the object ball....or the cue ball would have never taken the path it did, and traveled as far as it did with just follow through spin alone.
You are arguing semantics, not the actual issue.
'Legal' is being used in a manner that means compliance with definitions set forth by rules...
If you couldnt conclude that by context, please dont enter the conversation. Doing so would only be inflamatory and percieved as antagonizing.
'Legal' is being used in a manner that means compliance with definitions set forth by rules...
If you couldnt conclude that by context, please dont enter the conversation. Doing so would only be inflamatory and percieved as antagonizing.
My questions were replied to an a courteous manner. Which implied that realkingcobra perceived (not percieved) the questions as being what they were—courteous.
Semantocs...regardless of its wrapper.
Your persona is certainly wrapped up in your signature—and your user name. There is nothing courteous or pleasant there, in either one.
Best regards,
Dave
Not kidding guys.