an obvious foul

[longhair]

The BIH foul ethical question reminded me of a situation that happened to me about a month ago. I was playing in a weekly race-to-four nineball tournament and was playing way over my head. Playing for second place and part of the calcutta money, I was matched with a tough player from out of town. I won the flip and ran the first rack, but came up dry on the second break. My opponent made the one ball, but ended up very close to the two. He made a specatular bank on the two, but also obviously double hit the cueball. Everyone watching the match, including some very good players and our own Sarah Rousey, saw and heard the double hit. I am absolutely certain that he knew he had fouled. I asked, "uh, was that a double hit?" He paused, and said "no."

I had not asked for a ref because I respected this player and didn't want to shark him; I fully expected him to call the foul on himself (almost anyone can cheat me ONCE before I start calling refs, etc.). Since there was no official to appeal to at that point, I didn't protest further. I thought at the time that if he needs the win and the money that badly, I guess I will let him have it.

He ran out from there and ran out the rest of that match. I congratulated him on a match well played and retreated to my friends to whine about, and marvel over, being cheated in this way. Not that I would have beat a guy that runs four racks at a time.

I will never trust that player again, gamble, or have any other dealings with him. Unfortunately (fortunately?) I moved across the country a few days later and will probably never see him again.

I'm not really asking what y'all would have done, I'm just telling a story. And if that player happens to see this, then shame on you, jerk.

 

[ShootingArts]

seen it many a time

Any half-decent player knows when they double hit the cue ball. A surprising number won't call it on themselves or admit it if you ask about it. Had you simply said "foul" or "double hit" and stepped in to take the next shot odds are he wouldn't have said a word. When you acted a little tentative, he took advantage.

Hu

The BIH foul ethical question reminded me of a situation that happened to me about a month ago. I was playing in a weekly race-to-four nineball tournament and was playing way over my head. Playing for second place and part of the calcutta money, I was matched with a tough player from out of town. I won the flip and ran the first rack, but came up dry on the second break. My opponent made the one ball, but ended up very close to the two. He made a specatular bank on the two, but also obviously double hit the cueball. Everyone watching the match, including some very good players and our own Sarah Rousey, saw and heard the double hit. I am absolutely certain that he knew he had fouled. I asked, "uh, was that a double hit?" He paused, and said "no."

I had not asked for a ref because I respected this player and didn't want to shark him; I fully expected him to call the foul on himself (almost anyone can cheat me ONCE before I start calling refs, etc.). Since there was no official to appeal to at that point, I didn't protest further. I thought at the time that if he needs the win and the money that badly, I guess I will let him have it.

He ran out from there and ran out the rest of that match. I congratulated him on a match well played and retreated to my friends to whine about, and marvel over, being cheated in this way. Not that I would have beat a guy that runs four racks at a time.

I will never trust that player again, gamble, or have any other dealings with him. Unfortunately (fortunately?) I moved across the country a few days later and will probably never see him again.

I'm not really asking what y'all would have done, I'm just telling a story. And if that player happens to see this, then shame on you, jerk.

 

[Walt Frazier]

Any half-decent player knows when they double hit the cue ball. A surprising number won't call it on themselves or admit it if you ask about it. Had you simply said "foul" or "double hit" and stepped in to take the next shot odds are he wouldn't have said a word. When you acted a little tentative, he took advantage.

Hu

You are absoutely right Hu.In situations like that you must be assertive.

 

[longhair]

Any half-decent player knows when they double hit the cue ball. A surprising number won't call it on themselves or admit it if you ask about it. Had you simply said "foul" or "double hit" and stepped in to take the next shot odds are he wouldn't have said a word. When you acted a little tentative, he took advantage.

Hu

You're probably right about that. I guess I was still giving him a the opportunity to be honest, and it seemed like the polite way to open the subject.

 

[Bamacues]

Any half-decent player knows when they double hit the cue ball. A surprising number won't call it on themselves or admit it if you ask about it. Had you simply said "foul" or "double hit" and stepped in to take the next shot odds are he wouldn't have said a word. When you acted a little tentative, he took advantage.

Hu

Absolutely right. Playing for money brings out the true character of a player.

On a similar, and opposite, note, I was playing a very good player a few weeks ago in a tight match. We were hill-hill, when he shot the 6 ball and called a bad hit on himself. I never saw or heard it. I told him he could have kept on shooting and won the match, because no one would have known. His exact words were "I would have known". Not every pool player has to take a short cut.

If the guy you were playing was a really good player, he would have given the ball up and then proceded to beat you when he got back to the table. To me, it doesn't say much for his character or his confidence.
Joe

 

[Bob Jewett]

Any half-decent player knows when they double hit the cue ball. ....

That may be true, now, but in the 1960's I was playing in a tournament against a player who said he had traveled on the road with Lassiter, and he played well enough that he might have. His claim was that the cue ball continued through on such close shots because of the extra momentum it has after having been struck so recently. Of course this is total BS, but I think he really believed it.

As for the problem of the OP, one way to ask for a ruling after the fact is to set up the shot again on a different table and have the player shoot the shot again. If both players agree that the replayed shot is close enough to the original, then the TD can make a call.

I don't much care for the "shooter's always right" rule.

 

[Snapshot9]

Well

in gambling circles before all the ref stuff happened, if your opponent called a foul on you, it was a foul. You had the right to belabor the point, and to see if any spectators saw the shot, but it usually stuck unless the rules you were playing by proved it was not a foul.

Of course, this was before thought that any player would purposely lie just to get an advantage in the match, or sometimes, they just didn't know the truth of the shot, and double hits are in a gray area anyway.

I don't ask whether they fouled, I tell them whether they fouled. This is a real point of contention with me because a ref isn't always available, some are not qualified to ref to begin with, and this rule that it isn't a foul unless a ref says so just doesn't fly with me. A foul is a foul is a foul.

Many times a player is shooting where there doesn't seem to be a chance to foul, but they might.

I was playing in a weekly tournament recently, and a player was shooting the 8 ball in 9 ball, and after hitting the cue ball his stick went sideways hitting the 9 ball to roll over to the rail by the side pocket and back out
3-4 inches, it maybe traveled 14 inches all total. I called a foul because the cue ball came up to where the 9 ball was sitting originally, and said it would have effected the cue ball's path.

We got into a discussion of where the 9 ball was to begin with, with each of us disagreeing with the other. It was a hill-to-hill match, and I was not willing to concede the shot. We agreed to shoot the game over again with him breaking like before. He won the played over game, but I ended double dipping him in the final, so I consider it 'poetic justice'.... LOL and to make it even sweeter, I zipped him in both sets.

A race to 4 with a Calcutta??????? That's something I haven't heard before .... lol

 

[ShootingArts]

feel and sound

Bob,

What I was talking about was the feel and sound of a double hit. The shooter can close their eyes and totally ignore cue ball action and still know when they double hit the cue ball. With the cue ball and object ball close together, a high hit, and no ref hanging over the shot often the shooter is the only one that knows if they double hit or not.

"The shooter is always right" can be manipulated by the unscrupulous and there isn't a thing to do about it except fight fire with fire which is a lot less than ideal solution. There are certain rules in pool that still require it to be a gentleman's game and without a ref watching every game, tourney or gambling, I don't see any way to get around that.

When I catch someone blatantly cheating because of the shooter is always right rule I will wait until they are looking straight at my shot and make a blatant foul myself. When they come to the table I will deny fouling, remind them "remember the shooter is always right", and keep shooting. After finishing that run out I'll tell them that we can play any way they want to play but we will both play by the same standards. One or two have left with their lip hanging out but most call fouls on themselves after that little demonstration.

Hu

That may be true, now, but in the 1960's I was playing in a tournament against a player who said he had traveled on the road with Lassiter, and he played well enough that he might have. His claim was that the cue ball continued through on such close shots because of the extra momentum it has after having been struck so recently. Of course this is total BS, but I think he really believed it.

As for the problem of the OP, one way to ask for a ruling after the fact is to set up the shot again on a different table and have the player shoot the shot again. If both players agree that the replayed shot is close enough to the original, then the TD can make a call.

I don't much care for the "shooter's always right" rule.

 

[crawfish]

Absolutely right. Playing for money brings out the true character of a player.

On a similar, and opposite, note, I was playing a very good player a few weeks ago in a tight match. We were hill-hill, when he shot the 6 ball and called a bad hit on himself. I never saw or heard it. I told him he could have kept on shooting and won the match, because no one would have known. His exact words were "I would have known". Not every pool player has to take a short cut.

If the guy you were playing was a really good player, he would have given the ball up and then proceded to beat you when he got back to the table. To me, it doesn't say much for his character or his confidence.
Joe

Yeah, Joe; but, how many guys would do that for three hundred? It's a cruel world.

 

[Tom In Cincy]

I've heard a lot of excuses for 'not knowing the rules' or 'wasn't aware of a double hit'.

The 'OLD DAYS' or 'that's the way we play at so-and-so's pool hall' or the biggie... "I've never heard of that rule.. that's a stupid rule... who made that up?"

Gambling is an entirely different situation.. you get to pick (or negociate) the table, the opponent, the game, the rules, they amount, the odds, the spot, you pretty much try to eliminate all the gamble out of the contest.

Tournament and league rules are there to make the game played as FAIR as possible, for all the players.