A Question Of Rules VS. Ethics

[Roger Long]

A few days ago, someone posted a thread in this forum about a great gentleman and great player: Benny "The Goose" Conway.

Some years back, it was my honor and priviledge to get to know Benny as a personal friend. We competed against each other several times in tournamnents, and spent time discussing pool on several other occasions. It was during one such time that Benny posed this very question to me. I answered that I would go ahead and let my opponent shoot, and then I would call a foul on him. Benny just smiled and shook his head. When I asked him what was wrong with my answer, he replied that good players should always be good sports, first.

Since that time, I have realigned my thinking on this subject. I understand better now that winning and losing at pool isn't nearly as important as how I go about winning and losing.

Many thanks, Benny.

Roger

 

[JoeW]

Here is another way to look at it.
Nearly everyone has committed some act that would get them a prison term (not jail) if the rules were enforced. When I would explain the things that could get you prison time to my college classes nearly everyone (except the perfect blond) had to admit that they should have served time.

What would you think if we enforced every rule in life?

What would you have your opponent do to you under the same conditions?

Pool playing should be a game in which sportsmanship is important in a friendly game or a competitive match.

You are a representative of the sport of pool. How do you want the game to be viewed?

I think that Bob and Barbara have the right idea. There are rules and we do play by them. I will help you the first time because I want your best game, after that, pay attention.

When working with criminals my basic approach was once is chance, twice is coincidence, three times is a pattern -- go to jail.

I do not think that life is about enforcing the rules with people I do or do not like. I have my own standard of conduct and that is what I live by.

 

[Cuebacca]

I agree that sportsmanship is more important than winning. However, I would argue that one can have excellent sportsmanship without coaching one's opponent on their impending mistakes.

If one is required to tell his opponent that he's about to shoot the wrong ball in order to be a good sportsman, then he should also have to tell his opponent about the dead ball in the pack that he doesn't see, about the 1-9 combo that he seems to be overlooking and about the fact that he hasn't chalked in 6 shots and he might be likely to miscue soon.

Again, this is coming from someone who puts a very high value on sportsmanship. The primary example given in this thread I'd probably be more likely to warn someone about because usually it would mean that they didn't know the rule. But if the person is a decent player, they really don't have much of an excuse for not remembering or forgetting to ask what the rule is regarding scratches on the break.

I'd feel bad beating an absolute beginner by taking ball in hand after I failed to warn him about the kitchen rule, so I'd probably warn him. I'd also feel like a heel for getting beat by a champion after he spaced out about that rule and I warned him. JMHO.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I don't think there's any circumstance in which I wouldn't warn the player because that's what I hope they'd do for me. What "lesson" is taught by using the rules against them rather than my skills? That it's a cutthroat world where winning is paramount? Who wants to live there?

pj
chgo

 

[Cuebacca]

I don't think there's any circumstance in which I wouldn't warn the player because that's what I hope they'd do for me. What "lesson" is taught by using the rules against them rather than my skills? That it's a cutthroat world where winning is paramount? Who wants to live there?

pj
chgo

Although I can't speak for my opponent, I'd rather not be told if I'm about to foul. (That said, if you tell me, I would appreciate it and thank you for it.) If I'm allowed to make the mistake, it teaches me the lesson that I should pay attention to the game, IMO.

Learning the hard way, I'm more likely to remember. I'd much rather learn that in a weekly $10 entry tournament than having to learn that when I spent a thousand or two on a trip to Las Vegas, where my chances of being warned are really small.

As far as losing on the rules rather than skill... what about when someone lightly taps the cue ball on a practice stroke. No harm, no foul? Should we put the ball back or should the rule of ball in hand be enforced?

In any game both the persons skill and their opponent's skill comes into play, unless one happens to win every lag and break and run out all of their racks. Paying attention to the game is part of the game. This includes which balls are on the table in 8-ball and 9-ball, what the ball count is in one pocket, the fact that the break just occurred in 8-ball, etc. JMHO but I don't think it's black and white.

 

[Snapshot9]

a Good sport

is someone that follows all the rules of the game and sportsmanship.

If league, this is one rule I always tell my opponent if he doesn't put the cue ball in the kitchen because he hasn't 'started' yet. Once he does start he is on his own, and usually only for newbies to the game.

In a serious tournament or money match, I don't say anything because each player's responsibility to know the rules beforehand.

In a serious match, call it like a referee would call it. Think a baseball player would be foregiven for not tagging up on a caught flyball before preceeding around the bases ...... no, he wouldn't. Every other sport has to follow its rules, why shouldn't Pool?

 

[Cuebacca]

Here is another example that I think is similar... say you're playing 9-ball and have put your opponent on two fouls. After he makes the second foul, you warn him that he's "on two", and he acknowledges and agrees. Now it's your turn and you hook him, repositioning the 1-ball where it's set up for a combo on the 9.

Your opponent lines up to knock the 9-ball out of the way because he's apparently worried he'd make a bad kick and that you'll shoot the combo. This intentional foul will make three, but he forgot. Are you morally obligated to warn him even though you already did and he already acknowledged that he understood? What if this is hill-hill in the finals of the WPC... does that change your position?

 

[mantis99]

I don't think you are wrong handling it as you did, but I think I would have quickly told him his error before shooting.

 

[Nostroke]

Im with Steve 100%. Playing a good guy for nothing or cheap and I tell'm. Playing a pr#ck-"Foul!!"

 

[grindz]

good question

This kind of brings up a tangent question in my mind. Is knowing the rules better than your opponent a skill just like playing, that should be used to help defeat them? Not just with this specific example, but with any of the other dozens that we could come up with.

That's tough to choose at times.....but I do know when I see the pros, whether it's on TV matches or in real life letting their opponent know before they foul.....that it gains my respect. I watched Mika warn Efren at the Desert Shootout before an impending foul and I give him credit for it.

I'm sure many feel just the opposite though.

td

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I don't think there's any circumstance in which I wouldn't warn the player because that's what I hope they'd do for me. What "lesson" is taught by using the rules against them rather than my skills? That it's a cutthroat world where winning is paramount? Who wants to live there?

pj
chgo

Although I can't speak for my opponent, I'd rather not be told if I'm about to foul. (That said, if you tell me, I would appreciate it and thank you for it.) If I'm allowed to make the mistake, it teaches me the lesson that I should pay attention to the game, IMO.

Learning the hard way, I'm more likely to remember. I'd much rather learn that in a weekly $10 entry tournament than having to learn that when I spent a thousand or two on a trip to Las Vegas, where my chances of being warned are really small.

I think we should change how things are done in Vegas rather than do it like that everywhere, and doing it differently everywhere else is the way to start.

As far as losing on the rules rather than skill... what about when someone lightly taps the cue ball on a practice stroke. No harm, no foul?
Should we put the ball back or should the rule of ball in hand be enforced??

If it doesn't give an unfair advantage to the shooter, why is there a question?

Paying attention to the game is part of the game.

Maybe we're different in this way, but I'm not at all interested in competing to see who makes the fewest mistakes remembering the rules. To me that's just boring.

And I don't really believe that's why people are sticklers about the rules anyway - I think it's usually just to take advantage of the situation for personal gain and all these rationalizations are just excuses for that.

Here is another example that I think is similar... say you're playing 9-ball and have put your opponent on two fouls. After he makes the second foul, you warn him that he's "on two", and he acknowledges and agrees. Now it's your turn and you hook him, repositioning the 1-ball where it's set up for a combo on the 9.

Your opponent lines up to knock the 9-ball out of the way because he's apparently worried he'd make a bad kick and that you'll shoot the combo. This intentional foul will make three, but he forgot. Are you morally obligated to warn him even though you already did and he already acknowledged that he understood?

I don't think more examples are necessary - the principle is simple and universal: no harm, no foul and remembering each and every rule each and every time isn't something I'm interested in "winning" at.

Rules exist to make a fair test of skills possible. Pretending they're part of the skills being tested is a self-serving perversion of their purpose that makes the real test less meaningful, less interesting and less fun. More importantly, games are a way we teach our kids (and ourselves) how we should act toward each other generally. Do we want the lesson to be that winning is more important than generosity and sportsmanship?

What if this is hill-hill in the finals of the WPC... does that change your position?

Like other humans I'd want to ignore my principles, but maybe the opportunity to set a very visible example (and look like a saint) would help me stand up to the temptation. Fortunately I don't have to worry much about facing that choice.

pj
chgo

 

[MikeM]

This is one instance when I would ALWAYS warn my opponent. It's an easy one to forget especially after a long session. After you've had a few BIHs anywhere on the table it's easy to forget to place it behind the head string.

I wouldn't want to win on this foul.

MM

 

[bob c]

When I ask myself how I would feel if I were the player about to foul, I have to say I wouldn't expect my opponent to warn me. At least I wouldn't be upset if he didn't.

In league play I think you have to consider that you are not just playing for yourself. What are your team's expectations of you in a situation like this?

I have an Accu-Stats tape of Buddy playing Mika. Mika is about to foul and Buddy asks him, "Do you know the rules we're playing?" Mika says, "Yes." Buddy says, "OK," lets him shoot and then calls the foul. Mika was steamed.

 

[PKM]

As far as losing on the rules rather than skill... what about when someone lightly taps the cue ball on a practice stroke. No harm, no foul? Should we put the ball back or should the rule of ball in hand be enforced?

If it doesn't give an unfair advantage to the shooter, why is there a question?

You're saying there's no question that you should ignore the foul in that case?

I would tell my opponent in the OP's scenario, but I think you're going down a slippery slope here. In this case you've made a physical error with your stroke, that's not just knowing the rules.

 

[philw]

A few days ago, someone posted a thread in this forum about a great gentleman and great player: Benny "The Goose" Conway.

Some years back, it was my honor and priviledge to get to know Benny as a personal friend. We competed against each other several times in tournamnents, and spent time discussing pool on several other occasions. It was during one such time that Benny posed this very question to me. I answered that I would go ahead and let my opponent shoot, and then I would call a foul on him. Benny just smiled and shook his head. When I asked him what was wrong with my answer, he replied that good players should always be good sports, first.

Since that time, I have realigned my thinking on this subject. I understand better now that winning and losing at pool isn't nearly as important as how I go about winning and losing.

Many thanks, Benny.

Roger

Words to live by. No one likes losing but when I lose I see it as an opportunity to show what kind of character I possess. Be both gracious in winning and losing. Never pass up a chance to show good sportsmanship.
Philw

 

[Patrick Johnson]

In this case you've made a physical error with your stroke, that's not just knowing the rules.

That's still not a "skill" that I'm interested in testing against a competitor.

I'd call the foul if there was a reason to other than the fact that it's in the rules, like if it couldn't be fairly replaced or even if I thought a point needed to be made about the importance of the rules or about being more careful. I recognize the need for that sometimes, but for the most part I think innocent, inconsequential slipups should be forgiven. On the other hand, I also think the shooter should accept the call without complaint, whatever it is.

pj
chgo

 

[ne14tennis]

Think it's pretty close to call

So far, this has gotten a pretty good response and for that I thank you.

In closing I'd like to echo the comments of some by saying in every other sport there are rules. That's how sports are played. You don't get to choose what will be enforced. If it's seen .....it's normally called.

The defensive back who grabs the receiver after 5 yards isn't allowed to say "I forgot" and gets the play back, nor does the golfer who forgets to sign his/her score card given a second chance (Example Wie who got DQ'd today for that).

I don't use the rules "to win" a game. I capitalize when others make mistakes. Whether it be a missed ball or a foul.

I'd much rather not have to call a foul on someone and let the play determine the winner. Having said that, if the play presents an oppurtunity because someone forgot a rule.....I'm taking it.

My team knows that if it's hill/hill match and I'm playing, I am not going to give a BIH away and lose the match.

If I forget a rule (I won't), then I have no problem with someone calling me on it. My mistake - their gain.

Thanks for all the goo comments, I just wanted to see if I was in the minority.

 

[satman]

Happened to me once

This is a little off-topic, but I have to ask the OP/ref. To my understanding, your opponent's actions weren't a foul. You had the right to make him place the CB behind the headstring, but that's it. If you let him shoot from there, it's done and gone. Same as someone breaking from in front of the headstring...

right? or am i crazy?

-s

edit: I can't answer the poll, as I do all these things, depending on the situation and my relationship with the opponent.

I was playing a Mcdermott Tour stop once, 8-ball, winner moves to final 2 of the winners side. I scratched on the break, and my opponent took the cue ball to the other end of the table, and placed it in several locations. I thought he was just mapping out a plan. I turned my back, and he shot a ball in and broke up a cluster. I called a foul and he relented to his chair, then deciding to get a call on it. Tournament director came over, got the details, and called a "no foul" due to me not warning him. Since I had already picked up the cueball, he got a 2nd ball in hand and ran out to win the set.
I messed up twice in that situation. I should have never agreed to that 2nd ball in hand, since he relented to the foul and sat down.
The TD later told me it is unsportsmanlike conduct. I was supposed to warn him, and then if he proceeded it would be a foul. I asked Randy about the ruling a few months later, and he said it was not a foul. Since he helped with the revision of the rule book, and was in charge of the Tour, he would know the correct call.

 

[ne14tennis]

If there has been any misunderstanding

I hope that this post has not caused anyone to question whether I could be fair if I were to referee a match in which this team or player was involved. If it has I apologize. This player would absolutely get the same fair treatment as any other player if I were called to his table as a referee

My reference to the fact I am a referee was meant to show that I know the rules and I play within them as well as encourage other players to understand and play the rule.

My reference of my dislike of the player was as a player. I meant that in a different circumstance I may have warned a player, but this was a seasoned player that without question would have called a foul on me given the chance.

When I wear the BCAPL Referee uniform I am fairer than fair and make all rulings and calls based on the facts and what I see, regardless of the players involved.

Sorry if there was any misunderstanding.