A Double Hit is NOT a legal APA shot

droveto

droveto

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I'm learning why there is so much confusion in the APA about this rule.
Many posters here seem to think there is some rule in the APA that states double hits of the cue ball are legal shots.

From the 2012/2013 APA rule booklet:
"9. Fouls - If any of the following fouls are committed,
the penalty is ball-in-hand for the incoming player.
Make certain you have ball-in-hand before you touch the
cue ball by confirming with your opponent. Ball-in-hand
means you are allowed to place the cue ball anywhere
on the table and shoot the lowest numbered ball on the
table. Even after having addressed the cue ball, a player
may, if not satisfied with the placement, make further
adjustments with the hand, cue stick or any other
reasonable piece of equipment. A foul may be called
only if the player fouls while actually stroking at the cue
ball, meaning a double hit of the cue ball (sometimes
called double clutching)."

That seems pretty clear, doesn't it?
If that isn't enough for you, when you're playing a really soft shot and you realize you're going to foul because when the cue ball is on its' way that it's not going to hit the object ball hard enough to get a rail, just give it another tap while it's rolling since double hits are legal. Or, when your opponent is lining up his/her shot and accidentally taps the cue ball, but then hits it real quickly again while it's still rolling hoping you didn't see, don't call the foul...
 
Last edited:
droveto said:
I'm learning why there is so much confusion in the APA about this rule.
Many posters here seem to think there is some rule in the APA that states double hits of the cue ball are legal shots.

From the 2012/2013 APA rule booklet:
"9. Fouls - If any of the following fouls are committed,
the penalty is ball-in-hand for the incoming player.
Make certain you have ball-in-hand before you touch the
cue ball by confirming with your opponent. Ball-in-hand
means you are allowed to place the cue ball anywhere
on the table and shoot the lowest numbered ball on the
table. Even after having addressed the cue ball, a player
may, if not satisfied with the placement, make further
adjustments with the hand, cue stick or any other
reasonable piece of equipment. A foul may be called
only if the player fouls while actually stroking at the cue
ball, meaning a double hit of the cue ball (sometimes
called double clutching)."

That seems pretty clear, doesn't it?
If that isn't enough for you, when you're playing a really soft shot and you realize you're going to foul because when the cue ball is on its' way that it's not going to hit the object ball hard enough to get a rail, just give it another tap while it's rolling since double hits are legal. Or, when your opponent is lining up his/her shot and accidentally taps the cue ball, but then hits it real quickly again while it's still rolling hoping you didn't see, don't call the foul...
Click to expand...
What you are describing would not be a double hit, it would be an out and out foul interfering with the path of the cue ball.
 
macguy said:
What you are describing would not be a double hit, it would be an out and out foul interfering with the path of the cue ball.
Click to expand...

So, even though there is no stipulation written anywhere that states that mulitiple hits of the cue ball are okay from short distances, you're just going to go ahead and pretend somewhere that it does?
If you say it enough times, it does not magically become true. The rule is crystal clear. Double hits are fouls.
 
calcwby4u said:
That's why apa sucks



big time
Click to expand...

And what do you play, big mouth? Let's see your pedigree. Half of your posts are slams on the APA, but I doubt you could handle a decent player yourself. :rolleyes:

PS - It seems a recurring theme that people like you get ripped off.
 
I understand that there are some local areas that have local rules that make it OK if the balls are frozen of very close. I have heard that In that case some localities just choose not to call it a foul. That amounts to a sever disadvantage at the National Level
 
I think the double hit is covered twice. This would also fit the definition of a double hit:

Causing even the slightest movement or altering the course of the cue
ball, even accidentally, is a foul.
 
needs clarification

droveto said:
I'm learning why there is so much confusion in the APA about this rule.
Many posters here seem to think there is some rule in the APA that states double hits of the cue ball are legal shots.

From the 2012/2013 APA rule booklet:
"9. Fouls - If any of the following fouls are committed,
the penalty is ball-in-hand for the incoming player.
Make certain you have ball-in-hand before you touch the
cue ball by confirming with your opponent. Ball-in-hand
means you are allowed to place the cue ball anywhere
on the table and shoot the lowest numbered ball on the
table. Even after having addressed the cue ball, a player
may, if not satisfied with the placement, make further
adjustments with the hand, cue stick or any other
reasonable piece of equipment. A foul may be called
only if the player fouls while actually stroking at the cue
ball, meaning a double hit of the cue ball (sometimes
called double clutching)."

That seems pretty clear, doesn't it?
If that isn't enough for you, when you're playing a really soft shot and you realize you're going to foul because when the cue ball is on its' way that it's not going to hit the object ball hard enough to get a rail, just give it another tap while it's rolling since double hits are legal. Or, when your opponent is lining up his/her shot and accidentally taps the cue ball, but then hits it real quickly again while it's still rolling hoping you didn't see, don't call the foul...
Click to expand...


For me the text you copied and pasted is a strange way to explain a rule.It starts out with rules covering the placement of the cue ball by an incoming player with ball-in-hand but then mentions a double hit.For me the wording is confusing and I don't know why the APA would word it that way.
 
droveto said:
I'm learning why there is so much confusion in the APA about this rule.
Many posters here seem to think there is some rule in the APA that states double hits of the cue ball are legal shots.

From the 2012/2013 APA rule booklet:
"9. Fouls - If any of the following fouls are committed,
the penalty is ball-in-hand for the incoming player.
Make certain you have ball-in-hand before you touch the
cue ball by confirming with your opponent. Ball-in-hand
means you are allowed to place the cue ball anywhere
on the table and shoot the lowest numbered ball on the
table. Even after having addressed the cue ball, a player
may, if not satisfied with the placement, make further
adjustments with the hand, cue stick or any other
reasonable piece of equipment. A foul may be called
only if the player fouls while actually stroking at the cue
ball, meaning a double hit of the cue ball (sometimes
called double clutching)."

That seems pretty clear, doesn't it?
If that isn't enough for you, when you're playing a really soft shot and you realize you're going to foul because when the cue ball is on its' way that it's not going to hit the object ball hard enough to get a rail, just give it another tap while it's rolling since double hits are legal. Or, when your opponent is lining up his/her shot and accidentally taps the cue ball, but then hits it real quickly again while it's still rolling hoping you didn't see, don't call the foul...
Click to expand...

Can you give a link to a post where someone thinks it's ok to double hit in the APA? I can't see why anyone would interpret the rules that way.
 
smoooothstroke said:
For me the text you copied and pasted is a strange way to explain a rule.It starts out with rules covering the placement of the cue ball by an incoming player with ball-in-hand but then mentions a double hit.For me the wording is confusing and I don't know why the APA would word it that way.
Click to expand...

Strange or not, the bolded text clearly states the rule. The sentences that happen before and after the bolded text don't change the very straightforward sentence that says a double hit is a ball in hand foul.

Critique the semantics all you want, but a double hit is a foul in the APA.
 
droveto said:
So, even though there is no stipulation written anywhere that states that mulitiple hits of the cue ball are okay from short distances, you're just going to go ahead and pretend somewhere that it does?
If you say it enough times, it does not magically become true. The rule is crystal clear. Double hits are fouls.
Click to expand...
Of course it is a foul whether you define it as cueball interference or a double hit. I am not sure what it is you are trying to say.
There are generals that covers everything .
 
macguy said:
Of course it is a foul whether you define it as cueball interference or a double hit. I am not sure what it is you are trying to say.
There are generals that covers everything .
Click to expand...

I'm trying to say that both scenarios are fouls since some people seem to think the close up double hit is not an APA foul even though there isn't a single rule that distinguishes the close up double hit from one that is farther away.
 
smoooothstroke said:
For me the text you copied and pasted is a strange way to explain a rule.It starts out with rules covering the placement of the cue ball by an incoming player with ball-in-hand but then mentions a double hit.For me the wording is confusing and I don't know why the APA would word it that way.
Click to expand...

It seems to be referring to repositioning the cue ball with the end of you cue as you get ready to shoot after a ball in hand. People do it all the time especially when the cue ball is a little far away. I have seen it come up where someone moves the cue ball with the stick setting up their ball in hand shot and someone yells foul.

It seems strange they have to be so specific about the obvious but people are often dopes and grasping at straws trying to win making up their own ridiculous interpretation of rules. I once shot a ball down a rail and it touched the rail as the ball went in and the guy yelled "Foul, he didn't call the rail". The rules have to be dumbed down for the average goof playing the game to understand I guess..
 
Certainly a double hit is a foul.I read online the section you posted from the rule book.I wonder why they would state a rule or rules in such a confusing manner.Maybe they think they can avoid problems and arguments with double-talk?IMO one section should explain what the incoming player can do with ball-in-hand and a separate section should cover what constitutes a foul or double hit foul.

Not sure that rule booklet is the official APA rule book but it is on their website.
 
macguy said:
It seems to be referring to repositioning the cue ball with the end of you cue as you get ready to shoot after a ball in hand. People do it all the time especially when the cue ball is a little far away. I have seen it come up where someone moves the cue ball with the stick setting up their ball in hand shot and someone yells foul.

It seems strange they have to be so specific about the obvious but people are often dopes and grasping at straws trying to win making up their own ridiculous interpretation of rules. I once shot a ball down a rail and it touched the rail as the ball went in and the guy yelled "Foul, he didn't call the rail". The rules have to be dumbed down for the average goof playing the game to understand I guess..
Click to expand...

LOL,that sounds like the APA.
 
droveto said:
The APA is not the problem. The illiterate players are.
Click to expand...

It is a combination of a poorly worded rule book and players that either don't fully understand the rules as written, or players that want to interpret the rules the way they think it should be.

Regardless of what the rule states, a double hit is a foul. Making players understand what constitutes a double hit is another story.
 
BrokeStroke said:
It is a combination of a poorly worded rule book and players that either don't fully understand the rules as written, or players that want to interpret the rules the way they think it should be.

Regardless of what the rule states, a double hit is a foul. Making players understand what constitutes a double hit is another story.
Click to expand...

Double hit - The cue strikes the cue ball twice in the course of any shot or turn at the table. What else do they need to write? Does this really need to be defined? People who can't interpret this are completely illiterate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top