Another dreaded APA rules question...........

Maniac

Maniac

2manyQ's
Silver Member
Okay, it also could apply to other leagues (or even tournaments) as well, but it just so happened that this occured last night in the first round of the playoffs for our APA 9-ball league.

My player (we'll call him Joe), a SL7 was playing the other teams SL8 (we'll cal him Ted). It was the final and deciding match of the night. The two players agreed beforehand that they would rack their own balls. Ted asked if they could use the Magic Rack and Joe declined, saying he didn't want to use it. Joe wins the lag. They start the match and are running neck-and-neck after about 10 racks. They have been using the triangle rack up to this point. I look up as Ted is racking for himself around rack 11, and he is placing the balls on a Magic Rack. I said to Joe "Why is he using the Magic Rack? You shouldn't let him do that." Joe then says something to Ted about it and a short, minor argument ensues. My stance was that once the match had started, you shouldn't be allowed to switch equipment in the middle of it without the permission of both players. We made a point and Ted, not wanting to start a long, drawn-out fuss (to which I give him kudos), re-racked the balls using the triangle. Nothing else was said that night about this incident, but the other team's captain was cold-as-hell towards us for the rest of the time she was there. Now, keep in mind two things here before replying. One is, you can't go changing the cueball in the middle of a match without both parties/players being in agreement, and two is, Ted was making one or two balls EVERY time he broke using the triangle (not one single dry break). Another thing is, he was starting to use the Magic Rack not only in the middle of the match, but during HIS break (he had been behind mostly up to this point and had just pulled even). Since Joe won the lag, wouldn't it have made more sense to have let Joe started using the MR first if it was going to start being used after 10 racks had already been played?

I searched through the rule book AND Team Manual last night when I got home, but there is no rule concerning this scenario.

What do you say, and how would you have handled this? I mean, it all came out okay, with few hard feelings afterwards. I just felt a bit uneasy about it on my drive home. But then, I don't like confrontations of any type, but especially ones in an APA pool league.

FTR, Joe won by two balls and we qualify for the Tri-Cup tourney.

Maniac
 
Nightly Rules

Although not listed specifically, our APA league (for the past 28 years) has always used the equipment specified by the "home team" listed on the score sheet. The home team has always determined the table and the type of cue ball used. I think the rack type would fall into this catagory. Also, once started using equipment, there are no changes unless BOTH captains agree.
 
Congrats on the win, and advancing.

I don't recall seeing this situation addressed in the rules either.

I would think that if the magic rack had been discussed before the match began, and not agreed upon at that time, then it certainly should not have been used later in that match. Pretty brassy to even try, if you ask me.
 
My feeling is, if a player is racking his own, he should be able to use whatever rack he wants. It kind of defeats the purpose of RYO if someone is forced to use equipment he doesn't trust.

If Joe doesn't like that brand of rack, then he can use his own favorite. I don't think there's any rule that says they both have to use the same one.

You mentioned that Joe was making balls with the triangle, but not how Ted was doing. I bet he had some dry breaks. It sounds to me like Ted did not want an important match to be decided by lady luck, so he used a rack that he knows guarantees the balls are dead nuts frozen.

I can think of no rational reason for the other player to object unless he has a problem with Ted getting a tight rack. That may not be Joe's intention but that's how it comes across. And it's a picky thing to jump up and object to... in a tense situation this can come across as a move designed to rattle Ted or slow down his momentum.
 
justadub said:
Congrats on the win, and advancing.

I don't recall seeing this situation addressed in the rules either.

I would think that if the magic rack had been discussed before the match began, and not agreed upon at that time, then it certainly should not have been used later in that match. Pretty brassy to even try, if you ask me.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, the question was asked and answered before the match began. It should not have been brought out later.
 
from all that I've seen, unless both players agree with it, changes during match of any equipment aren't allowed, except perhaps in the event of breakage - a tip flying off a shaft for instance.

If it was me actually playing I would have let him use the magic rack for his racking, but kept to whatever I felt most comfortable with for my own.
 
What has this world come to? You use the rack that's with the table, you don't change mid match unless it gets broke. You don't get to take all the supplied balls off after 1st shooter is done and replace with your favorities. Jeeeesus!
 
If RYO,,,then what does it matter what is used to rack the balls. A guy could use his hands if he wants,with no rack.

Ranks in there with what type of cue stick,,chalk,,ect. Or any item that is used only by one player.

But on the other hand,,I can see how this could happen. Since it was discussed before the match. And then he tried to use it anyhow. But it's something that should have never been a issue or discussed.

Kinda like saying before the match,,that no predator cues can be used. Or you can't drink red wine while we play.
 
Couple things here....

#1 Quit wasting your time with the APA
#2 You should never us anything other than the mud cueball because otherwise your going to play like shit in vegas if you make it
#3 people change equipment all the time during matches... Putting on a glove, changing shafts, changing cues, shaping their tip.....
#4 This has NOTHING to do with the rule book, this has to do with the fact that it was discussed before the match, and Ted obviously agreed by default when he started the match and didn't rack with the MR. If he wanted to use the MR so badly, then he should have demanded it at the start of the match, and maybe a compremize could have been made... The fact that he just tried to sneak in the MR is a complete joke to me, and if anything your team should be pissed about him trying to kanive you like that.

Oh and to Creedo response about lady luck.... Its an APA league on what I am assuming is a Valley barbox, this is plenty of luck involved no matter what rack your using.

Finally, if you can't get a tight rack with a triangle rack, then why the **** are you racking your own?!
 
Joe and Ted made a bargain, rack your own.
Ted wants to amend the bargain to include the magic rack. Joe declines; bargain stays

Ted later amends the agreement without Joe's consent. Sounds like breach of contract to me.

I'm not a lawyet, but I recently saw My Cousin Vinny. :-)
 
I think the mistake was asking for permission to use the magic rack in the first place. I believe the rule addressing this is the one that says "any piece of equipment specifically designed for pocket billiards." The rule specifically forbids jump cues (lets' not start that one again...) and laser devices or cues with movable parts, if I'm not mistaken the Magic Rack is designed specifically for pocket billiards. But after agreeing not to use it you can't just go back and start to use it. Frequently, although the APA would never admit it, teams have "gentleman's agreements" within matches all the time, you don't just go back on it if things aren't going your way. My thought is that the Magic Rack would have been perfectly legal to use unless there is some facility or local rule forbidding it, but once it was agreed that there be no use of the Magic Rack it was totally off the table unless another agreement was made
 
ctyhntr said:
Joe and Ted made a bargain, rack your own.
Ted wants to amend the bargain to include the magic rack. Joe declines; bargain stays

Ted later amends the agreement without Joe's consent. Sounds like breach of contract to me.

I'm not a lawyet, but I recently saw My Cousin Vinny. :-)
Click to expand...

Yeah, but it sound like those two "youts" worked out their differences in the end. Not sure why OP needed to post...
 
Pool Rooms South of Boston

Going to the Bridgewater, Taunton area for a few days besides Westgate Lanes that Harry owns are there any rooms in the 10 to 20 mile area off RT 24 Thanks
 
I think both player should agree if the equipment is going to be changed.

The magic rack gives me a much higher percent of making a ball on the break so I would have told the guy NO.
 
Was the other team captain hot looking and do you think you had a chance with her? Those are two things you need to take into account before complaining.

If Ted was making balls every break with the triangle and wanted to change I would have kept quiet.
 
Changing Mid Game

We had a somewhat similar situation in an APA 9 ball singles regional last year. I knew the guy that I was going to play in the quarters and we had both commented on how it was tough to get a good rack and we had not been making balls on the break. Sure enough after two racks (one him/one me) he suggested using the MR. I said I had no problem but we got the league operators blessing first and used it for the remainder of the match. Based on what I have seen the MR is going to give the better breaker a huge advantage, especially with the no roll out rule in APA :banghead: In this case I think that switching mid match without the oponents consent seems a little ballsy.
 
nobcitypool said:
Perhaps something has changed since this was posted but it appears the MR is not legal for any kind of APA play. http://apa-atlanta.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1181 I've read this in other places and specifically asked our league operator about it as well with the answer being the same.
Click to expand...


APA better add that to the manual because how can anybody be expected to find the forum post referenced above?

I actually do not understand why they wouldn't allow it. I guess because balls could potentially land on it or change the path of a ball that rolls over it. The thing is APA already allows slop. If you allow slop what is the problem with a ball changing direction by a really small amount?
 
TheNewSharkster said:
APA better add that to the manual because how can anybody be expected to find the forum post referenced above?

I actually do not understand why they wouldn't allow it. I guess because balls could potentially land on it or change the path of a ball that rolls over it. The thing is APA already allows slop. If you allow slop what is the problem with a ball changing direction by a really small amount?
Click to expand...

Forgive me for clarifying, hut hasn't Texas express style 9-ball always been a "slop" game? Just because this is an APA thread doesnt mean that "slop" has to be introduced into the discussion, does it?

Oh wait, I forgot, this is AZB, of course it does.

:p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top