APA Double Hit Madness

S

spoons

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
This one's for all you APAers out there. I'm having a bear of a time getting an answer on this one through the local leagues, so I thought I'd come here and see what you folks say.


A shooter had ball in hand. He placed the cue ball into a tight spot roughly 2 inches away from the object ball and nearly directly in line with the pocket. He then used a level stroke hitting high on the cue ball and in one motion, stroked through the shot with a follow through of about 8-10 inches. The cue ball and the object ball left at approximately the same speed, headed in the same direction, and there was no visible hesitation of the cue ball, after it struck the object ball and before it moved forward. There were no neutral parties to watch the shot (even the bar owner was on the opposing team), so I watched the shot myself.

There is no question in my mind that the shot was a "double hit," meaning that the player's cue struck the cue ball twice on the shot. In fact, our opponent agreed with me that the shot was probably a double hit, and an illegal shot.

Now, here's my question: In APA play, can I (or anyone else) call a foul on that shot? With my naked eye, I did not see the cue contact the cue ball twice, because it happened so fast that it would have been virtually impossible to see. It was also too loud in the bar to clearly hear the second contact.

Our opponent last night said that even though it might have been an illegal shot, I cannot call a foul unless I see the second contact occur. I see some merit in his argument, but at the same time, it would be just as easy for me (or anyone else) to say that "yes, I did see the second contact occur." In addition, although I did not see the second contact specifically, there was visual evidence to prove that the shot was physically impossible to perform without committing a foul.

My other argument against our opponent's opinion is a local bylaw: rule #1: show me the rule. If you can't show the rule to your opponent, it is not a rule.

I have looked though the team manual, and can't seem to find anywhere that the APA has addressed the double hit specifically. There are only three potentially applicable references that I could find. 1) Under fouls: "Causing even the slightest movement or altering the course of the cue ball, even accidentally, is a foul." (page 50); 2) "Sometimes a miscue may result in a foul because the cue ball was struck twice..." the definition of a miscue (page 96) and 3) The definition of a push shot (page 97).

It is my understanding that push shots and double hits are not the same thing. That push shots refer to maintaining contact between the cue and cue ball for longer than normal (only really practical when the cue ball is frozen to an object ball) and that a double hit would be closer to altering the path of a moving cue ball. There seem to be differing opinions around the league on that one, though, so maybe we can get an explanation of how the APA would differentiate between the two. The miscue definition seems to clearly state that hitting the cue ball twice is a foul.

So what's the APA's stance on this? Can anyone help me out here? It seems like this comes up once a week at least, and I'd like to know how to handle the situation. If I can't call the foul in the APA, that's fine, but I would like to know why.

Thanks!
 
The next time an opponent or team member doesn't agree with your appraisal of a double hit situation, ask them to watch all of the videos here:

Maybe the next time they will better understand how to tell what happened by what the balls do.

Good luck!
Dave

spoons said:
This one's for all you APAers out there. I'm having a bear of a time getting an answer on this one through the local leagues, so I thought I'd come here and see what you folks say.

A shooter had ball in hand. He placed the cue ball into a tight spot roughly 2 inches away from the object ball and nearly directly in line with the pocket. He then used a level stroke hitting high on the cue ball and in one motion, stroked through the shot with a follow through of about 8-10 inches. The cue ball and the object ball left at approximately the same speed, headed in the same direction, and there was no visible hesitation of the cue ball, after it struck the object ball and before it moved forward. There were no neutral parties to watch the shot (even the bar owner was on the opposing team), so I watched the shot myself.

There is no question in my mind that the shot was a "double hit," meaning that the player's cue struck the cue ball twice on the shot. In fact, our opponent agreed with me that the shot was probably a double hit, and an illegal shot.

Now, here's my question: In APA play, can I (or anyone else) call a foul on that shot? With my naked eye, I did not see the cue contact the cue ball twice, because it happened so fast that it would have been virtually impossible to see. It was also too loud in the bar to clearly hear the second contact.

Our opponent last night said that even though it might have been an illegal shot, I cannot call a foul unless I see the second contact occur. I see some merit in his argument, but at the same time, it would be just as easy for me (or anyone else) to say that "yes, I did see the second contact occur." In addition, although I did not see the second contact specifically, there was visual evidence to prove that the shot was physically impossible to perform without committing a foul.

My other argument against our opponent's opinion is a local bylaw: rule #1: show me the rule. If you can't show the rule to your opponent, it is not a rule.

I have looked though the team manual, and can't seem to find anywhere that the APA has addressed the double hit specifically. There are only three potentially applicable references that I could find. 1) Under fouls: "Causing even the slightest movement or altering the course of the cue ball, even accidentally, is a foul." (page 50); 2) "Sometimes a miscue may result in a foul because the cue ball was struck twice..." the definition of a miscue (page 96) and 3) The definition of a push shot (page 97).

It is my understanding that push shots and double hits are not the same thing. That push shots refer to maintaining contact between the cue and cue ball for longer than normal (only really practical when the cue ball is frozen to an object ball) and that a double hit would be closer to altering the path of a moving cue ball. There seem to be differing opinions around the league on that one, though, so maybe we can get an explanation of how the APA would differentiate between the two. The miscue definition seems to clearly state that hitting the cue ball twice is a foul.

So what's the APA's stance on this? Can anyone help me out here? It seems like this comes up once a week at least, and I'd like to know how to handle the situation. If I can't call the foul in the APA, that's fine, but I would like to know why.

Thanks!
Click to expand...
 
I can't help you with the specific rule in this case but it's purdy sad that your opponent operates this way - in league play no less. Sign of the times, I guess.
 
Yes, you can call a foul on this. You can prove the double hit, and double hitting the cue ball IS a foul. "Seeing the foul" is not a part of the rule, or any rule book I have ever read. I need to look at the manual but I know there is a line that says that a double hit is a foul, but it is not a very clear rule in the book.
 
This was addressed more or less (you know vague APA is, even with the rules being explained) at our cities tournament.

Said more or less that if the object ball is the distance of a cube of chalk or less from the cue ball, it will be considered a foul, UNLESS you hit the cue ball at a 35 degree angle or greater (I'll assume draw, follow, or side as well).

This not really a bad explanation, and about as good as it gets, APA wise. Not a bad rule of thumb, either.
 
I played APA for a few years and we ALWAYS called this a double hit.....you can clearly tell by the reaction of the balls, even if it is not clearly visible....the guy is a jerk for trying to argue otherwise.....

My apologies for not being able to point it out in the rules....personally, EVERY game you play should be played by the spirit of the rules, not just by whatever is written.....rules cannot cover every situation known to man....
 
In most leagues, and I believe it's true for APA as well, unless you get a shot watched by an outside party, the call goes to the shooter, regardless of what you, yourself saw. If he doesn't want to give you ball in hand and you didn't get it watched, it's his call. It sucks but people use that rule to their advantage all the time.

I think the double hit rules gets confused with the push foul a lot in APA. In our area, the league operators think they are the same thing and they rule a double hit as legal, but that is unique to the APA league where I live only bc they misinterpret the rule. All other places where I have played in an APA tournament, a double hit is considered a foul.
 
The only other spot I could find in the rules was "A foul may be called only if the player fouls the cue ball while actually stroking at the cue ball, meaning a double hit of the cue ball (sometimes called double clutching)."

This does not apply in this case, so I would rely on the rule G you addressed in your post, on altering the path of the cue ball.

As far as using any kind of 35 degree or 45 degree rule, this still does not ensure a foul has not occurred, you still have to see a "Natural path" of the cue ball after the hit. If you are shooting straight into a ball that is only 1/4 inch in front of the cue ball, jack up 85 degrees, but the cue ball follows the object ball, it was still a double hit.

Edit:

Also, the APA website also has a place to send questions to them. They usually respond by email or phone within 48 hours.

http://www.poolplayers.com/
 
Last edited:
Big Perm said:
I played APA for a few years and we ALWAYS called this a double hit.....you can clearly tell by the reaction of the balls, even if it is not clearly visible....the guy is a jerk for trying to argue otherwise.....

My apologies for not being able to point it out in the rules....personally, EVERY game you play should be played by the spirit of the rules, not just by whatever is written.....rules cannot cover every situation known to man....
Click to expand...

That's a bit judgemental, IMO. As a fellow APAer, not all shooters take the time to learn about the game. You know the type. Not a bad guy, but maybe say a bit hard headed? :)
 
As this poster says, ALWAYS, get a neutral party to watch the hit, otherwise the foul can only be called by the shooter.

After admitting that is a double hit, the shooter should have given you BIH.

CrisDeLaGarza said:
In most leagues, and I believe it's true for APA as well, unless you get a shot watched by an outside party, the call goes to the shooter, regardless of what you, yourself saw. If he doesn't want to give you ball in hand and you didn't get it watched, it's his call. It sucks but people use that rule to their advantage all the time.

I think the double hit rules gets confused with the push foul a lot in APA. In our area, the league operators think they are the same thing and they rule a double hit as legal, but that is unique to the APA league where I live only bc they misinterpret the rule. All other places where I have played in an APA tournament, a double hit is considered a foul.
Click to expand...
 
In APA, if....

the cue ball and OB are less a chalk's width apart, a double cannot be called. If the separation is greater, then the double hit can be called.

Then again, if the person is dishonest, they can say a double hit never occurred. In that case the call goes to the shooter.

If someone was called upon to watch the hit and they declared it a good or bad hit then that ruling/call stands.
 
Gregg said:
That's a bit judgemental, IMO. As a fellow APAer, not all shooters take the time to learn about the game. You know the type. Not a bad guy, but maybe say a bit hard headed? :)
Click to expand...

On one hand I agree. However the point in Spoons original post I found very telling of this team was that the player admitted that he may have double hit the cue ball, but because you couldn't "see" the double hit he could not call it. That statement speaks volumes against that whole team, since none of them corrected that statement.
 
Gregg said:
That's a bit judgemental, IMO. As a fellow APAer, not all shooters take the time to learn about the game. You know the type. Not a bad guy, but maybe say a bit hard headed? :)
Click to expand...

I reserve the right to be judgemental as I have also known been known to be a jerk every now and then :D
 
Big Perm said:
I reserve the right to be judgemental as I have also known been known to be a jerk every now and then :D
Click to expand...

I'm sure these are not the only 2 things you have ever been called either. :thumbup:
 
soulcatcher said:
On one hand I agree. However the point in Spoons original post I found very telling of this team was that the player admitted that he may have double hit the cue ball, but because you couldn't "see" the double hit he could not call it. That statement speaks volumes against that whole team, since none of them corrected that statement.
Click to expand...


Actually, the two most knowledgeable players on their team agreed with me. Only one of them argued that I couldn't call the foul though. The other one approached me after the match and apologized for his teammate's behavior.
 
spoons said:
Thanks for the reply Dave, but that's probably not very practical in a bar.
Click to expand...
I wasn't suggesting to show the videos in a bar. That is ridiculous. I was suggesting to ask the person to watch the videos (e.g., after they go home or to their cave) so they can learn why you thought the shot was a foul. Then, if you are lucky, the person might at least buy you a beer next week for being a stupid jerk. But if the person really is a stupid jerk, he or she might not like computers or videos, and probably wouldn't be man or woman enough to admit a mistake. But it can't hurt trying.

Regards,
Dave
 
s'portplayer said:
As this poster says, ALWAYS, get a neutral party to watch the hit, otherwise the foul can only be called by the shooter.

After admitting that is a double hit, the shooter should have given you BIH.
Click to expand...


There truly weren't any neutral parties in the bar. I wish there had been, but the only people in the place were players on the two teams.

But, this might actually be a trump card for the other team. If the two teams can't agree on the call, then the call goes to the shooter, right?
 
dr_dave said:
I was suggesting to ask the person to watch the videos (e.g., after they go home or to their cave) so they can learn why you thought the shot was a foul.
Click to expand...


Fair point.

Many places, I wouldn't have even had to call the foul, because most knowledgeable players wouldn't have tried the shot. But, I guess I was more interested in whether the APA considers it a foul, or if this is one of those look the other way situations like a miscue on the break that you stop before it hits the rack....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top