A poll

Which player wins the bet?

  • Player A wins the bet

    Votes: 33 16.2%

  • Player B wins the bet

    Votes: 171 83.8%
  • Total voters
    204
Neil said:
The bet was to make the ob and break up the cluster.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if you don't get more specific while you're proposing the bet, the above is what "breakout" means. Now obviously in the pursuit of winning the game, a breakout isn't worth much if you don't get a shot afterwards. But in the pursuit of winning a bet regarding whether a breakout can be made, it's a success.

-Andrew
 
Neil said:
I'm rather surprised that anyone voted for A. Let's take it to the extreme...you are playing 14.1, you have a full rack with the break ball sitting perfectly. You make the ball and scatter the rack so that no two balls are even touching each other. But, you have no shot! Is there anyone willing to say that the shooter didn't get a breakout?? Seems like everyone would be saying he broke the heck out of them and got screwed.

Someone is clutching at straws to avoid paying a bet they lost.

To those that voted A, what constitutes having no shot? I've seen C players pull of shots that they will only make that one time in their life, no matter how long they practice it! There's always a shot. The shooter might not have the skill to make it very often, but the shot is there. What if the balls ended up wide open, but a long shot that the shooter is likely to miss anyways? Does he still have no shot because he doesn't have the skill to make a long shot?

The bet was to make the ob and break up the cluster. That was accomplished. If you are going to bet on something, you better understand the wording of the bet before you agree to it.
Click to expand...

I voted for A

I clicked the wrong damn button! The break out was executed. Just wasn't a good break out.

Ken
 
Bishop said:
That's pretty much how I look at it. The entire purpose of a break out is to gain space while maintaining the run. If you can't continue the run then you didn't successfully complete the breakout you just banged balls around.

I see a pretty significant different between the intention of banging balls around and completing a successful breakout.

So wouldn't "breakout" by definition include the actual intended purpose, breaking balls out to continue the run, otherwise the act would be called something else such as "banging balls around" or "opening the pot".

I don't know anyone who attempts to break balls out without also intending to continue the run. I know plenty of people who attempt to open the table or bang balls for their next turn on the table. Two different things in my opinion.
Click to expand...

That may be the point of a break-out in a game, if you break them out but don't get a shot, you are really in the same spot.

But the bet was "to get the break out", not to "make a good shot and run out". Like making a bet that you will jump off a 20' cliff, then the other guy did not pay up because you broke your leg. You could say that the point of the jump was also to land safely, not just the fact that you jumped. But the bet is that the guy actually jumped.
 
Luxury said:
We agreed to let the poll decide who wins.

Player A doesn't think player B can get a break out from the current position. Both players agree to bet.

Player B makes the shot and runs into the cluster of three balls and two of the balls get bumped about six inches each as the cue ball marries up to the ball that would be shot next.

Player A believes he wins because it was not considered a break out because the next shot can not be made. Player B thinks he wins the bet because the balls were bumped by the cue ball and separated six inches.

So who should win the bet?
Click to expand...

Is the intention whether or not you can hit the cluster, or whether or not you can break out a shot?

In 14.1 I don't consider it a break out, for example, if the cue ball is frozen to the rack and some balls on the other side move.
 
Last edited:
It's not a break out if your cousin got caught by the police 5 miles down the road!
 
TATE said:
It's not a break out if your cue ball is frozen with no shot!
Click to expand...

If you made a bet that you can hit a target at an archery range, you do, but the other guy said you failed because you did not hit the bullseye, would that be the right call?

A breakout shot would be when you have balls tied up, you hit them and move them in a different position. A GOOD breakout shot would be if you hit them and get a shot. It would have been a breakout shot even if the guy got hooked by another ball.

Another analogy, you make a bet that you can break at 30mph. You do, but nothing drops on the break. Guy does not pay up because you did not have a "successful" break. That's probably a 100% comparison there, you execute the shot per bet, but not a good shot if you were in a game.
 
There are 3 possibilities:

1. Doesn't hit the cluster at all.
2. Hits the cluster but doesn't get a shot.
3. Hits the cluster and gets a shot.

Both 2 and 3 are break-outs. 1 is obviously not a break-out at all. Some might call 1 a failed break-out. I would call 2 a failed break-out and 3 a successful break-out.

But, by the way the bet was typed by the OP, it was not qualified as to whether it needed to be a successful break-out or not. So, by the way the bet was typed, if Player B did 2 or 3, he wins the bet.

If the bet was that he got another shot, you wouldn't have had to talk about the break-out at all.....
 
Last edited:
Neil said:
I'm rather surprised that anyone voted for A. Let's take it to the extreme...you are playing 14.1, you have a full rack with the break ball sitting perfectly. You make the ball and scatter the rack so that no two balls are even touching each other. But, you have no shot! Is there anyone willing to say that the shooter didn't get a breakout?? Seems like everyone would be saying he broke the heck out of them and got screwed.

Someone is clutching at straws to avoid paying a bet they lost.

To those that voted A, what constitutes having no shot? I've seen C players pull of shots that they will only make that one time in their life, no matter how long they practice it! There's always a shot. The shooter might not have the skill to make it very often, but the shot is there. What if the balls ended up wide open, but a long shot that the shooter is likely to miss anyways? Does he still have no shot because he doesn't have the skill to make a long shot?

The bet was to make the ob and break up the cluster. That was accomplished. If you are going to bet on something, you better understand the wording of the bet before you agree to it.
Click to expand...

What he said. He broke the ball out of the cluster, which is what he was challenged to do.

<-- Wouldn't want to play long with anybody that says otherwise.
 
I voted for B because it seemed that the bet was that the cue ball could not be sent there from where it was on a certain shot & the wording 'successful breakout' was not in the bet, but even that could be argued unless 'getting another makable shot' was inserted as a qualifier.

You get the point or points. I hope you are winning the bet.:wink:

Regards,
 
Unless player A specified player B had to make a ball after the breakout, player B wins the bet.

Player A is bad action for failing to pay off.
 
I don't think a breakout is a breakout if you just freeze the CB up to the object ball.
Without any stipulation the bet is controversial, but all in all it looks like about 17 of are right>>:smile:
 
I think they both should lose for failing to define the bet unambiguously. If they send me the stake, I'll donate it to a pool-related charity.

The bet could have been: "Bet you can't run X balls." Or it could have been: "Bet you can't get the cue ball to touch that cluster." Or it could have been: "Bet you can't bump those balls so they are all one ball apart from each other including the cue ball." (In all cases the standard stipulation of only legal shots being permitted is in force.)

But the bet was none of those.
 
Last edited:
Luxury said:
We agreed to let the poll decide who wins.

Player A doesn't think player B can get a break out from the current position. Both players agree to bet.

Player B makes the shot and runs into the cluster of three balls and two of the balls get bumped about six inches each as the cue ball marries up to the ball that would be shot next.

Player A believes he wins because it was not considered a break out because the next shot can not be made. Player B thinks he wins the bet because the balls were bumped by the cue ball and separated six inches.

So who should win the bet?
Click to expand...

The bet was to break the balls out not run out.Player A loses.:smile:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top