10ball rule question - really confused?

I see it as if your opponent calls safe, and executes a legal safe, then slops in a ball, he cannot continue shooting and passes control. You then do not (or should not, i feel) have the option to pass control back. Because your opponent called safe on the specified object ball (the lowest #ed ball), he would have to accidentally have made that ball for you to have the option of maintaining or conceding control. If he were to call the pocket and slop in another ball, then, idk. its up to if the rules were to be silly enough to give the non shooting player the option, or to allow the shooter to keep shooting. I think some ten ball tourney's rules are over complicated.
 
Well, so far the conclusion is that there is no clear answer, only different opinions, even Jay is not really sure (except for the fact that the actual WPA rules of 10b are pretty f**cked up which I totally agree with). I am going to bring this issue to official EPBF referee who is a good friend of mine, I will let you know the result.
 
I would say, that even though there seems to be a hole in the 10-ball rules which Marek brought up, there is a way to interpret the rules to clarify this.

The problem lies in the term "legal object ball", which imho is not 100% always the lowest numbered ball on the table. The requirement to hit the lowest numbered ball on the table is in the beginning of the rules. I'd say the "legal object ball" means any ball on the table with emphasis on the world "legal" meaning that the requirement to hit lowest numbered ball on the table has been met. When you think of it this way, the sentence in 9.6

"However, if the shooter pockets the legal object ball the incoming player has the option to play the shot as left, or hand it back to his opponent."

makes sense, because now it covers all ball instead of just the lowest numbered ball on the table.

Greets,
Mikko, official EPBF referee

Note: this is not the official interpretation from EPBF, just my opinion. I've gone through the rules word-by-word with EPBF/WPA officials twice so I know something I'm talking about :)
 
This came from my friend Mikko (EPBF official referee):

"I would say that even though in rule 9.6 the "legal object ball" refers to the lowest numbered ball on the table, I'd say it's presumed that a "legal object ball" is something you are trying to pocket, meaning that it can be another ball than the lowest numbered ball on the table. So, the phrase in 9.6 indicates that the incoming player has the option to shoot or make the original shooter shoot again. The requirement to hit a specific ball on the table is written in the beginning of the rules. "Legal" object ball means any ball on the table and the "legal" emphasizes that a lowest numbered ball has been hit first."

Well, it tells me that I was right to return the shot to my opponent and will use the ruling in the future as well.

Edit: Mikko was faster than me... :D
 
Last edited:
mjantti said:
I would say, that even though there seems to be a hole in the 10-ball rules which Marek brought up, there is a way to interpret the rules to clarify this.

The problem lies in the term "legal object ball", which imho is not 100% always the lowest numbered ball on the table. The requirement to hit the lowest numbered ball on the table is in the beginning of the rules. I'd say the "legal object ball" means any ball on the table with emphasis on the world "legal" meaning that the requirement to hit lowest numbered ball on the table has been met. When you think of it this way, the sentence in 9.6

"However, if the shooter pockets the legal object ball the incoming player has the option to play the shot as left, or hand it back to his opponent."
makes sense, because now it covers all ball instead of just the lowest numbered ball on the table.

Greets,
Mikko, official EPBF referee

Note: this is not the official interpretation from EPBF, just my opinion. I've gone through the rules word-by-word with EPBF/WPA officials twice so I know something I'm talking about :)
Click to expand...

Mikko - I would agree with youexcept for one grammatical techicality.

The rule portion you quoted says "THE legal object ball" with the word THE implying that there is only one legal object ball to be pocketed for the purposes of this rule. If on the other hand it said "A legal object ball; then it could be interpreted as you say..

Clarification is needed from the Rule Gods, that is for sure
 
The only logical "safe" call would be, if I call a safe, no matter what I make or miss, as long as I hit the lowest ball, the oponent shoots from where I left him. If I call a safe in 8-ball, I can pocket the ball I'm shooting at, and just turn the table over to the opponent.

They want to take out the luck in 10-ball, so if you go for a shot, miss and leave the guy hooked, then the other guy can make you shoot again. If you call a safe, nothing you make counts but the other guy can't make you shoot again.

Almost every time I see 10-ball played the only rule I see is "no 10 on the break", sometimes. People get fed up with trying to sort out the rules and just play by 9-ball rules.
 
GADawg said:
Mikko - I would agree with youexcept for one grammatical techicality.

The rule portion you quoted says "THE legal object ball" with the word THE implying that there is only one legal object ball to be pocketed for the purposes of this rule. If on the other hand it said "A legal object ball; then it could be interpreted as you say..

Clarification is needed from the Rule Gods, that is for sure
Click to expand...

I'm afraid you're right. But then if the ruling is unclear because of certain wording and a grammatical technicality, I'd say we'd stick to the fact that there is should be no misunderstanding what the rule is trying to say: when playing safe, it doesn't matter which ball goes in, if we are talking about balls or object balls and legal object balls; if something goes down on a safety, the opponent has always the choice of choosing which player is to continue. Too bad the wording on the rule doesn't cover all the situations as Marek pointed in the first place.

I know there are ppl willing to split hairs here (I'm usually one of them :D) but I think it's very clear what the rules are trying to say.

I know that many players don't like the 10-ball rules. Actually they are very easy if you know a few guidelines. It's just if you hate that slop shots don't count and two-way shots aren't there, of course you're bashing the rules. I think the guidelines of the WPA 10-ball rules are excellent, except on wording with this case perhaps being the prime example on that. Playing slop shot 10-ball with 9-ball rules plus an extra ball just because the loudest ones don't like the WPA rules is just stupid. IMHO.
 
I wouldn't call the idea of playing 10 Ball with 9 Ball rules stupid. I get what you are saying about slop, 2-way shots, and all that. And I agree with you that 10 Ball should be a call shot game.

But there is a legitimate reason to play what is essentially 9 Ball, but with 10 balls. For those that don't have a problem with the luck factor in 9 Ball it does remedy the problems inherent with the 9 Ball rack and break.

My problem with playing 10 Ball this way is that it could become the standard and culturally dominate the game of 10 Ball to where call shot 10 Ball fades away. My feeling is that if you want to play 9 Ball rules but eliminate the breaking issues then rack 10 balls and after the break when the balls come to rest take the 10 ball off the table and play 9 ball. If the 10 ball happens to go down on the break it counts towards the breaker getting to stay at the table. The 9 ball would be placed in the center "money ball" position and the 10 ball can be racked anywhere since there is no yet discovered dead shot in the 10 ball rack. Or specify that the 10 gets racked in the same specific location every rack (like behind the one or something).

Let's call it 9.5 Ball.

I like the idea that 10 Ball and 9 Ball are two different games. Though I may prefer 10 Ball I don't hate 9 Ball at all aside from the issues with the break. I want these 2 different games to continue and I would not like to see true 10 Ball get cobbled up by 9 Ball rules is all.
 
I understand perfectly what you are saying and I almost completely agree, very wise words, tap tap tap. But I would say that if we have a problem in 9-ball, we shouldn't try to fix it by changing to another game and then playing it like 9-ball. There is a problem in 9-ball and it's definitely the break, but we should concentrate on fixing that somehow, I don't like the current solution. Let 10-ball be a different game with the call shot and with all it's pros and cons it creates. I really like the call shot 10-ball, even more than slop shot 10-ball played 9-ball style. I really wouldn't like to see the "traditional" 9-ball to be pushed away to be replaced by 10-ball (any rules). I like traditions, my favourite game is 14.1 and occasionally 1pocket, you see ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top