3 foul after break in 9ball

perspicaz

o-^-*-^-o
Silver Member
Is it common practice to go for a 3 foul with a safe on the 1 after your opponent miscues on the break and touches no balls in 9ball? :eek:

This happened to me the other day and left me... let's say a little surprised. I understand it is most likely legal, just wanted to know if it is an usual occurrence and your opinion on this.
 

8Ball48043

Addicted to the Sport
Silver Member
Is it common practice to go for a 3 foul with a safe on the 1 after your opponent miscues on the break and touches no balls in 9ball? :eek:

This happened to me the other day and left me... let's say a little surprised. I understand it is most likely legal, just wanted to know if it is an usual occurrence and your opinion on this.

A three foul win is just as valid and legitimate as a 9-ball run out. If the break is especially bad (balls clustered) and a run out is not possible, then a three foul win is a good, if not the only option, for a win.

The balls tightly bunched not only makes a run-out impossible, but very nicely facilitates going to for a three foul win.

IMHO.
 

woodyosborne

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
a three foul win is as good as any other win.

shows good control as well as demonstrating your knowledge of the game. you have to have "game" to pull it off but you do get a running start with ball in hand and your opponent with one foul to start the game. three fouling is a perfectly good move. may irk weaker opponents but everybody is playing the same game(except for spots). can sure irritate players as well. lol.
 

Ball Banger

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I am more of a tournament player than a Gambler. But it does amaze me how the 3 foul rule doesn't apply at this room because you are not one of our good old boys. Hey if the spread is right, why not go for 3 fouls? But remember when playing safes, position for the next safe is just as important. I have a great respect for the master player of the safe.
 

Duane Tuula

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
It's the worst rule in 9-ball IMHO. Rules have changed and hopefully this one goes away permanently down the road.
 

perspicaz

o-^-*-^-o
Silver Member
Im especially talking about the fact that a player is allowed to execute a safe off the stack (with ball in hand anywhere on the table) after the opponent miscues on the break and does not even touch the rack.

Although legal, to me seems like a perversion of the rule really. Should be considered an "invalid break", but not a foul, with the other player getting the break (or the chance to let the other player break) IMO.

The rule can be found here:

http://www.bca-pool.com/play/tournaments/rules/rls_9bl.shtml
 
Last edited:

MarcusG19

Future Best In Canada
Silver Member
Where are you finding that rule???
in the 404 tournaments i believe they use it. If the cue ball crosses the line when a player is breaking and its not a legal break a player can have ball in hand and take a regular shot. (a ball has to hit a rail) and hook the original breaker behind the racked balls for the second and 3rd hook.

it may not have been the 404 but there was a few tournaments with this rule.
 

Pushout

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've only played where the non-breaker gets the break himself. If necessary, the balls are reracked. Having the shot at three fouls in a situation like this is ridiculous. 9 ball is becoming an absolute joke, which is why I seldom play it and am returning to Straight Pool and One Pocket.
 

MarcusG19

Future Best In Canada
Silver Member
I've only played where the non-breaker gets the break himself. If necessary, the balls are reracked. Having the shot at three fouls in a situation like this is ridiculous. 9 ball is becoming an absolute joke, which is why I seldom play it and am returning to Straight Pool and One Pocket.

I don't see alot of places that use the rule. But i don't mind it. If a player breaks and the CB goes in a pocket. Don't you try to 3 hook him? Why should it be any different if he doesn't hit the rack or throw 3 balls to the rail?

To be the game of nine ball is based on the idea that ONE MISTAKE and you loose the game. And messing up your break, which is arguably the most important shot, not cost you the game? (assuming the other player makes no mistakes!)
 

Danktrees

RIP RS
Silver Member
IMHO, someone really dropped the ball on that rule. But, even with the rule, the incoming player should be able to hit the one within two tries. 9 out of ten times, it's only going to be a one rail kick at it.

thats if u butcher the safe. if u do it normally then it's a lot harder than a 1 rail kick. if u tick the one then freeze it to the stack it's way harder than just a 1 rail kick, plus they have to kick at it by shooting over a ball.
 

perspicaz

o-^-*-^-o
Silver Member
thats if u butcher the safe. if u do it normally then it's a lot harder than a 1 rail kick. if u tick the one then freeze it to the stack it's way harder than just a 1 rail kick, plus they have to kick at it by shooting over a ball.

Definitely harder, it was on a 7ft and he managed to block one side of the 1 completely and almost half of the other side, while I had to use spin off the rail just to achieve enough angle. I think I would have had a better chance at it just by slamming the balls open and making his next safe harder.

IMHO the rule should be that if the break is not valid, the balls are re-racked and the other player breaks rather than this travesty. I don't mind the 3 foul rule but only after a valid break has taken place.
 
Last edited:

Goldy

Beating The Internet
Silver Member
Many different rules on the subject. I personally like the one offered up by the APA, which states a cue ball foul can only occur after the rack is struck. And in the case for 9-ball the head ball (1) has to be struck first no matter what.

No foul until the rack is struck.
 
Top