APA Frustration with Constant Double Hit Violations

woody_968 said:
It originated in the BCA rule book. I'm not talking about BCA league, I mean the rule book that was always referred to before all these leagues with different rules. I have not read one of the recent issues, so it may have been changed, but the chalk width measurement was talked about in all the releases that I have read.

Edit: for my own curiosity I looked up the current BCA rules on their website. They have changed the wording of the rule and it no longer uses chalk as an example of width. It was in the older books and that is where the term came from.
Click to expand...

I don't play in BCA (yet). I was introduced to pool via APA and that's where I've stayed. If "a chalk width" is used in BCA then that's where that rule should stay.

I've heard this brought up before and when I show them the bylaws they feign shock or let out the famous "well, that's not what I was told".

This thread is about APA and double hits and I can speak on that. BCA? Not so much.
 
GeoEnvi said:
- I blame Dr. Dave for giving me conviction in my accusations. His videos clearly demonstrate the double hits, the limited way of avoiding them (there are not 5 ways), and how to detect them by judging the reaction of the balls. No league banger has the right to overrule me unless he has also watched the Dr's videos.
Click to expand...
For those interested, all of my videos (many done with Bob Jewett) related to detecting and avoiding double hits can be found on the double-hit foul resource page.

Enjoy,
Dave
 
Just so everyone can rest easy....this doesn't come up all that often. And then, usually with lower level/beginners.

It's only APA, I suppose, and for the most part, we manage to have a good time and play some pool. No one gets hurt.
 
When I was playing in the APA our LO would tell us that if the balls were close that it was illegal to shoot straight at the balls period. He is completely aware that it is possiable at times to make a clean hit on close balls. However would state that at the national level their refs are told to call a foul if you aim through the balls, whether or not a clean hit is made.
So to make it simple for everyone, the "refs" tell a player that "if you shoot straight through, it will be a foul."
If balls are frozen, your allowed to shoot through.
In that sense you only really had to have the refs watch when balls are a bit farther apart. Lower skilled players can double hit balls that are 2-4 inches apart.

I've went to APA nationals on a few occasions. Twice as a competitor. These rules seemed in line with enforcement at nationals.

My LO is a pretty decent player himself, and been around pool the majority of his adult life so maybe he's just more understanding of the integrity of the actual games.
 
4onthebreak said:
I don't play in BCA (yet). I was introduced to pool via APA and that's where I've stayed. If "a chalk width" is used in BCA then that's where that rule should stay.

I've heard this brought up before and when I show them the bylaws they feign shock or let out the famous "well, that's not what I was told".

This thread is about APA and double hits and I can speak on that. BCA? Not so much.
Click to expand...

I was not talking about the BCA pool league. I was talking about the Billiard Congress of America which was the rule sets that were played by before all these leagues started forming and making up their own rules. I agree with you, if you are playing in APA then theirs is the rule book that should be followed, even if it is wrong LOL.

http://home.bca-pool.com/ Used to be the closest thing we had to a governing body on pool so to speak. If your at all interested the rules are under the Play Pool tab.

I'm going off memory, so my wording may be a little off, but the old rule stated that if the cue ball and object ball were less than a chalk width apart. Unless the ref could be certain their was no foul if the cue ball traveled farther forward than half the distance of the object ball the shot was a foul.

IMHO it was actually one of the best written rules concerning the double hit. The wording they give now does not come close to clearly defining a double hit.
 
Most hits can be judged by sound. That is how I was shown by Steve Tipton who is the head ref for the women's tour a few times a year. He says if it looks close and sounds bad there is your answer. Our league operator here in Memphis is clueless about watching hits because he was taught by Apa guidelines which are normally not good. But hey it benefits your weak players on your team who does not know either. I could care less in a league situation but if I'm in action I will double check who I allow to watch. Even some of the great a players don't know how to watch completely.
 
not real keen on judging by sound..most that ref around here need help knowning
what the tangent line is to start with..lol. I just accept the call an move on..its apa for
heaven sake !!
 
The only way that i have found to keep people from doing it is to keep them away from the table as much as my limited skill can...lol
 
woody_968 said:
It originated in the BCA rule book. I'm not talking about BCA league, I mean the rule book that was always referred to before all these leagues with different rules. I have not read one of the recent issues, so it may have been changed, but the chalk width measurement was talked about in all the releases that I have read.

Edit: for my own curiosity I looked up the current BCA rules on their website. They have changed the wording of the rule and it no longer uses chalk as an example of width. It was in the older books and that is where the term came from.
Click to expand...
The chalk-width thing was never actually a rule and should never have appeared in the rules. It was put into the old BCA rule book as a guide for refereeing when no competent referee was present. The guideline is false. It is possible to follow a close ball without fouling and it is possible to double hit when the cue ball is more than a chalk away from the object ball.
 
BRussell said:
I'd like to hear your 5 ways. I can think of shooting at an angle or stopping your tip very abruptly after contact, but that's really hard.. Maybe shooting to the side (i.e., with English), but I don't know if that works reliably.
Click to expand...

You can also avoid the double hit with a fouette shot.

But the safest way to avoid the foul is to hit well away with inside english.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top