Good grief -- they were playing 9ball not 14.1 on that video.
In this country, 9ball is most commonly played as a CB fouls only game.
Lou Figueroa
Last edited:
14.1 Stats -- John Schmidt's Run of 434 on Video, December 2018
- Thread starter AtLarge
- Start date
Good grief -- they were playing 9ball not 14.1 on that video.
In this country, 9ball is most commonly played as a CB fouls only game.
Lou Figueroa
9-BALL 60's and on.
Lou, he's learnin' about our past.
Since both of us have been playing since the sixties it's been the norm in the past, if opponent touches ONE ball, or moves it, opponents option to either leave it where it lies or, or put in back in place. If two balls are moved....foul BIH
It makes the game fair/less chance of conflict....when your matching up.
The nice thing about the seated shooter, being able to move it back into it's original place, you often can better your table position subtly, by and inch either way, and Opponent has little to say, since he semi fouled.
In pro play, all fouls is the ONLY WAY.
Lou, he's learnin' about our past.
Since both of us have been playing since the sixties it's been the norm in the past, if opponent touches ONE ball, or moves it, opponents option to either leave it where it lies or, or put in back in place. If two balls are moved....foul BIH
It makes the game fair/less chance of conflict....when your matching up.
The nice thing about the seated shooter, being able to move it back into it's original place, you often can better your table position subtly, by and inch either way, and Opponent has little to say, since he semi fouled.
In pro play, all fouls is the ONLY WAY.
Last edited:
And Willie didn't ask Fats if he wanted to keep it where it went or put it back. He just moved it where he wanted it to go. Which was nowhere close to it's original location.
...and then what? Would you like to make a point based on that information?
I assume it is now universally common (regardless of which type game) in un-refereed/non-televised private matches, that when the shooter accidentally moves an object ball, he just automatically replaces it to it's original position. Much for the same reasons ‘all foul’ rules were likely relaxed for preliminary/un-refereed pro games (less arguing and resultant tournament delay), leaving the option of disputing the position of the replaced OB up to your opponent to initiate, merely speeds play and avoids hassles. If you disagree on its proper location, and consider it a critical issue, it should be up to you to object & correct the placement.
Of course, old-school 14.1 traditionalists may still elect to play ‘all fouls’, since that was how it was done ‘back-in-the-day’.
Consider also that it was a made for TV event and the producers undoubtably told them, "Keep it moving fellas," so as to maintain excitement and momentum and not lose the audience in technicalities and safety play.
Besides, Fats was right there and said nothing, and Charlie Ursitti was right there and said nothing. Which all leads me to believe the aforementioned directive was in play.
Lou Figueroa
Last edited:
I agree.
But without referees the game becomes a bottomless pit of arguments.
Lou Figueroa
‘Arguments’ is putting it mildly. I was once playing straight pool in a quiet, high class traditional room, and two respectable-appearing middle-aged gentlemen on the next table were engrossed in a long one-pocket match. There was then some contention re: a foul issue that was not amicably resolved, and one of the players quit and unscrewed his cue. When his opponent turned his back, the quitter swung the butt like a baseball bat and brained the guy!
I could use your p.s. as an easy out and say I was referring to straight pool, and I wouldn't look so stupid either, but, sadly that's not the case, I was referencing games in general. :embarrassed2:
Although let me say this, I am interested in the history behind the "only cue ball fouls" if someone wouldn't mind explaining the timeframe this happened, or point me in the right direction. Was this when the BCA and WPA merged rules, I did try and read a bit into it. But I am not an expert by any means on the APA , BCA, and WPA rulesets from the past. Just sharing my personal experience with the game.
No, absolutely not. The "one touched ball OK" rule is that the offended player chooses whether to replace the ball or leave it where it got moved to. That's been a rule for a long time when the full rules are not applied.
Anyone who touches a ball and then quickly grabs it and puts it back under "cue ball fouls only" has committed a foul.
The rule came into the US rules because gambling pool players cannot be trusted to play by the rules and a simple "I saw your shirt touch that ball" is a quick way to rob the slimy sucker you're playing of his inning. Or be robbed of your inning. Really. That was the argument for moving away from all fouls. That happened about 1980 as far as official rule sets are concerned.
When the WPA revised the rules of pool in 2006 the first approved draft removed all reference to "cue ball fouls only". (That is of course a misnomer since there are lots of non-cue-ball fouls that still count as fouls.) The final draft ended up with a suggestion for how to implement "touching balls by accident is not a foul" and my understanding is that it was done only for the Americans. The rest of the world seemed to be happy to play "all fouls".
That bears a second mention.
Thank you very much!
Bob I see your points. I know you have played in the World 14.1 as I have also many times and for as long as I have played in the World Tournament and for as long as I have played straight pool it has always been touching of any ball is a foul and loss of turn or inning with no exceptions.
I remember 2 times where this came into play for me. Once against Oliver Ortmann I touched a 10 ball while bridging over a ball inside the rack area and no one saw it and the ball didn't move from position but I did touch it and I called a foul on myself. Oliver didn't want my inning to stop but we both knew the rules and so be it he ran the set out on me. The other time I was Playing Mike Deschaine and was just about done running the whole set out on him and he called a shirt foul on me. As their was no referee around to say I fouled and had to take Mike for his word my inning stopped and I lost that match also.
So as I see it in todays world of playing as it has also been for the last 35 years in straight pool all fouls committed are a foul and the inning stops. So Johns 434 is NOT valid and its is from what another poster has said 112 balls less for a total of 322 which would start from the next break ball in the next rack. ( it is post 314 in this thread)
Even still a great run on a very very easy table.
Last edited:
I much prefer all fouls, but that's not how the 14.1 leagues around here play. Most of them play "one touched ball OK" except one of them uses "all ball fouls" but only in the playoffs.
I played a tournament once against a seasons player, touched a ball and next thing you know, that ob was right behind the cb and I needed a ladder to get over it.
:yikes::sad::rotflmao1:
:yikes::sad::rotflmao1:
Lou, he's learnin' about our past.
Since both of us have been playing since the sixties it's been the norm in the past, if opponent touches ONE ball, or moves it, opponents option to either leave it where it lies or, or put in back in place. If two balls are moved....foul BIH
It makes the game fair/less chance of conflict....when your matching up.
The nice thing about the seated shooter, being able to move it back into it's original place, you often can better your table position subtly, by and inch either way, and Opponent has little to say, since he semi fouled.
In pro play, all fouls is the ONLY WAY.
Of course I agree with you all ball fouls. We are not talking about a weekly pool league here Bob. We are talking about a professional pool player which 100% fouled during a shot and which means that the run stops right there. Its a foul that is recorded on video.
This is the rules at Derby City straight pool challenge was the rule at Super Billiards Expo challenge and the rule at American 14.1 the US Open 14.1 and the World 14.1. So do you feel John gets some kind of free pass and his foul should be ignored. All ball fouls has been in place in all these events for many years and still is currently.
Just my two cents... maybe it shouldn’t be ignored, but why is anyone making a big deal out of it? He had no opponent. He wasn’t playing in a tournament. There was no money for it. Why does anyone care about the foul at this point? If he ran 600, it might be worthy of a discussion.