FYI, I just posted a video demonstrating many of the rolling-CB carom angle approaches discussed in this thread (from Bob, me and Patrick). Check it out in the new thread:
12 Ways to AIM WITH A POOL CUE
- Thread starter dr_dave
- Start date
FYI, I just posted a video demonstrating many of the rolling-CB carom angle approaches discussed in this thread (from Bob, me and Patrick). Check it out in the new thread:
A little insight on the CSI rule for those who might be curious:
Not just "now", but ever since 2007 with the introduction of the original edition of the CSI (then BCAPL) rule set. The reason for the departure from the WSR requirement to keep a hand on the cue was twofold.
First, the decision makers were of the opinion that there is very little to be gained by releasing the cue and stepping away. Yes, it is possible to get a wider view of the table and it is conceivable that might aid in visualizing an angle, when it comes right down to it, who cares? At any rate, they thought any advantage gained is highly unlikely to be significant, and more importantly it was not significant enough to outweigh the second reason.
The second reason was to eliminate the "tie the shoe" scenario, which I am sad to report actually happened more often than a reasonable person would think. Player lays stick on table to tie a shoe or pay for a drink or for any other reason not related to a shot. Immediately some idiot, who also happens to be the opponent, starts going off and screaming foul.
There was never any intent to prohibit such a practice, and although not spelled out specifically, the writing supports allowing the player to do so for two reasons.
First, the rule states that you may use the cue to align "a shot". By definition, a shot is comprised of the action of the balls from the time the tip contacts the CB until all balls have stopped. That clearly includes the CB carom.
Second, even if you don't buy that, CSI enforcement policy (at least for the 16 years I was involved and both on the floor and editing) has always followed this most basic legal principle: anything that is not specifically prohibited is therefore legal. Said another way, not every legal act must be specifically permitted. No statute was ever written in any jurisdiction that says "it is legal to go see a movie". By that principle, since aligning a carom is not prohibited then it is legal.
Yes, that principle gets bucked every now and then, but this would not qualify. And when the principle does get challenged by an unanticipated wrinkle in a situation, if a change is needed it should be swiftly written in to prevent "fool me twice" situations. If the challenge is the result of a ridiculous act of some button-pushing prankster or idiot, the the UC clause or the mockery clause is usually sufficient to handle the situation.
Buddy
Not just "now", but ever since 2007 with the introduction of the original edition of the CSI (then BCAPL) rule set. The reason for the departure from the WSR requirement to keep a hand on the cue was twofold.
First, the decision makers were of the opinion that there is very little to be gained by releasing the cue and stepping away. Yes, it is possible to get a wider view of the table and it is conceivable that might aid in visualizing an angle, when it comes right down to it, who cares? At any rate, they thought any advantage gained is highly unlikely to be significant, and more importantly it was not significant enough to outweigh the second reason.
The second reason was to eliminate the "tie the shoe" scenario, which I am sad to report actually happened more often than a reasonable person would think. Player lays stick on table to tie a shoe or pay for a drink or for any other reason not related to a shot. Immediately some idiot, who also happens to be the opponent, starts going off and screaming foul.
There was never any intent to prohibit such a practice, and although not spelled out specifically, the writing supports allowing the player to do so for two reasons.
First, the rule states that you may use the cue to align "a shot". By definition, a shot is comprised of the action of the balls from the time the tip contacts the CB until all balls have stopped. That clearly includes the CB carom.
Second, even if you don't buy that, CSI enforcement policy (at least for the 16 years I was involved and both on the floor and editing) has always followed this most basic legal principle: anything that is not specifically prohibited is therefore legal. Said another way, not every legal act must be specifically permitted. No statute was ever written in any jurisdiction that says "it is legal to go see a movie". By that principle, since aligning a carom is not prohibited then it is legal.
Yes, that principle gets bucked every now and then, but this would not qualify. And when the principle does get challenged by an unanticipated wrinkle in a situation, if a change is needed it should be swiftly written in to prevent "fool me twice" situations. If the challenge is the result of a ridiculous act of some button-pushing prankster or idiot, the the UC clause or the mockery clause is usually sufficient to handle the situation.
Buddy
Last edited: