When the CB and OB are almost touching, I know that you have to aim 'away' from the object ball with a level cue to avoid a double hit. How much away from the OB do you have to aim? 1/2 ball? 1/4 ball? I am looking for an accurate or exact amount here. Thanks.
CB and OB Almost Frozen, Good Hit or Foul?
- Thread starter cuetechasaurus
- Start date
I've never known the exact amount for sure. I've always just guessed that if you are lined up to hit centerball on the cueball, your tip cant be pointed towards any part of the object ball. That makes sense to me, but if you use sidespin, especially inside english, I get confused. I would appreciate if anyone could provide an accurate degree to which you must be aimed away from the object ball.
cuetechasaurus said:
Here is an excerpt from the New Standard Rules that just went into effect.
6.7 Double Hit / Frozen Balls
If the cue stick contacts the cue ball more than once on a shot, the shot is a foul. If the cue ball is close to but not touching an object ball and the cue tip is still on the cue ball when the cue ball contacts that object ball, the shot is a foul. If the cue ball is very close to an object ball, and the shooter barely grazes that object ball on the shot, the shot is assumed not to violate the first paragraph of this rule, even though the tip is arguably still on the cue ball when ball-ball contact is made.
However, if the cue ball is touching an object ball at the start of the shot, it is legal to shoot towards or partly into that ball (provided it is a legal target within the rules of the game) and if the object ball is moved by such a shot, it is considered to have been contacted by the cue ball. (Even though it may be legal to shoot towards such a touching or ?frozen? ball, care must be taken not to violate the rules in the first paragraph if there are additional balls close by.)
The cue ball is assumed not to be touching any ball unless it is declared touching by the referee or opponent. It is the shooter?s responsibility to get the declaration before the shot. Playing away from a frozen ball does not constitute having hit that ball unless specified in the rules of the game.
You can be aimed at the ball if you are hitting it high enough. I am no expert (by any means), but I would suggest that their is no exact answer here, and that it depends on the current situation. Where you want to hit the ball, what angle the ball is off the CB and how far away etc will all make a difference.
The main reason why I bring this up, is that I was asked to make a call on a shot yesterday during a match. It appeared to be an obvious double-hit, so I called foul. I judged it was a foul by looking at the tangent line the cueball should have travelled if it were a good hit. If the cueball pushed thru that tangent line, it was obviously a foul. That's what happened, but he argued with me, saying that he was lined up half-ball, even though it looked more like he was lined up 2/3 ball. He went nuts and wouldn't even let me explain, he just kept saying that he was lined up half-ball. I never heard of lining up half ball as a rule of thumb, so that's why I am trying to get an exact figure on what it is.
cuetechasaurus said:
I think you called it using the right evidence (and it sounds like you called it correctly). There's no reliable rule of thumb that I know of for how much angle will definitely produce a good hit - you just have to know how to tell from what the cue ball does, as you did. It's not that hard if you think it through (preferably before refereeing a match). The cue ball should act like it normally does from farther away. If it does act normally, then even if it was a double hit it doesn't really matter.
pj
chgo
cuetechasaurus said:
The issue is under what (whose) rules was the match being conducted?
As I posted, the new World Standard Rules provide that "If the cue ball is very close to an object ball, and the shooter barely grazes that object ball on the shot, the shot is assumed not to violate the first paragraph of this rule, even though the tip is arguably still on the cue ball when ball-ball contact is made. "
Therefore, under the WSRs, the shot would have to be at an EXTREME angle so that the OB is "barely grazed" by the CB. So, any fraction like 1/2 or 2/3 would not come close to complying with the new rules (I don't know what the old rules provide but Bob Jewett would).
But again, what set of rules was the match conducted under? There are local rules, BCA rules. BCA League Rules (which I have been told are different) and the WSRs.
blackeee said:
Bob Jewett can answer the question too...since he wrote the World Standard Rules!
But again, the WSRs don't necessarily govern every match. But there must be SOME set of rules decided upon in advance or it's just ref discretion and everyone else can shut their pie holes! (-:
The rules currently published on the BCA website have the same paragraph numbers as the WSRs have and may be derived in whole or in part from the WSRs. I just don't know.
But the BCA rules are different.
"3.23 FOULS BY DOUBLE HITS
If the cue ball is touching the required object ball prior to the shot, the player may shoot toward it,
providing that any normal stroke is employed. If the cue stick strikes the cue ball more than once on a
shot, or if the cue stick is in contact with the cue ball when or after the cue ball contacts an object ball, the
shot is a foul. (See Rule 2.20 for judging this kind of shot.) If a third ball is close by, care should be taken
not to foul that ball under the first part of this rule."
So, you can only shoot into the OB if the CB and OB are touching. Otherwise, if a double tap occurs it is a foul...period.
Regards,
Jim
from the WSR Book
This is what we use here for our ACS leagues...Terry
3.23 FOULS BY DOUBLE HITS
If the cue ball is touching the required object ball prior to the shot, the player may shoot toward it, providing that any normal stroke is employed. If the cue stick strikes the cue ball more than once on a shot, or if the cue stick is in contact with the cue ball when or after the cue ball contacts an object ball, the shot is a foul. (See Rule 2.20 for judging this kind of shot.) If a third ball is close by, care should be taken not to foul that ball under the first part of this rule.
2.20 JUDGING DOUBLE HITS
When the distance between the cue ball and the object ball is less than the width of a chalk cube, (See Diagram 18) special attention from the referee is required. In such a situation, unless the referee can positively determine a legal shot has been performed, the following guidance may apply: if the cue ball follows through the object ball more than 1/2 ball, it is a foul.
This is what we use here for our ACS leagues...Terry
3.23 FOULS BY DOUBLE HITS
If the cue ball is touching the required object ball prior to the shot, the player may shoot toward it, providing that any normal stroke is employed. If the cue stick strikes the cue ball more than once on a shot, or if the cue stick is in contact with the cue ball when or after the cue ball contacts an object ball, the shot is a foul. (See Rule 2.20 for judging this kind of shot.) If a third ball is close by, care should be taken not to foul that ball under the first part of this rule.
2.20 JUDGING DOUBLE HITS
When the distance between the cue ball and the object ball is less than the width of a chalk cube, (See Diagram 18) special attention from the referee is required. In such a situation, unless the referee can positively determine a legal shot has been performed, the following guidance may apply: if the cue ball follows through the object ball more than 1/2 ball, it is a foul.
The rule you quoted doesn't say that angles less than "barely grazed" are fouls. It only defines "barely grazed" as a "safe harbor" that definitely isn't a foul.
There is no rule that I know of that defines the angle below which a good hit can't be made. In fact, I think it would be practically impossible to write such a rule because the distance between the balls makes such a big difference.
pj
chgo
Obviously (to most) it's not a statement about any specific rule; it's a statement about the purpose of rules and how concerned we should be with them in circumstances like these. If violating the rule doesn't make a difference, then it doesn't really matter if you can't detect it. And conversely if you can't detect it, then it probably doesn't make a difference.
pj
chgo
cuetechasaurus said:
Out at the BCA in Vegas, there was a gentleman that would bet money on a shot where the cue ball was about 1/32" from the object ball. He could hit that ball, stop the cue ball and not double hit. If a ball is double-hit, you can usually hear the hit.
But, all in all, I do not know exactly what angle would justify getting away from or causing a double-hit. You would have to do exactly as you did, use your own judgment. I usually look for someone aiming at a quarter ball overlap to feel comfortable making the call. If less than that, I use my judgment.
Whenever I judge a situation like this, I usually give them an explanation (as you tried to do) of what occurred so they know better next time.
In BCA, there is a ruling that if you are close to an object ball, you are jacked up drawing the shot, you get a good hit and the cue ball travels forward past half the distance of where the object ball was sitting, it is classified as a bad hit..
I don't know of any written rules that say this, probably because it's impractical to define.
The physical reality is that the CB has to carom at an angle that's parallel enough with the tip's direction so the tip can't catch up with it during followthrough and hit it again. This seems simple enough until you introduce things like sidespin, which changes the relevant angles, and different distances between the balls, which changes the timing. I think any rule that specified the angle would be wrong in too many instances to be a good rule. I think it should be judged by watching the CB's action, armed with knowledge of what's normal - maybe the rules should specify some "normalcy indicators".
pj
chgo
Last edited:
cuetechasaurus said:
If it makes you feel any better, you were right and he was wrong.
As to how much cut angle you have to be lined up with in order to avoid the double kiss, I believe it depends on english, stroke speed, and possibly grip tightness as well. English will change which way the tip deflects, and thus exactly where it is when the second contact either does or does not occur. This effect would also be variable with low-deflection vs. high-deflection shafts. Also, the tip offset itself, even if the tip did not deflect off-line, changes where the follow-through is directed exactly, and thus whether the second contact takes place. Stroke speed matters, I think, because it changes the timing of how quickly the tip "catches up" with the CB when the CB hits the OB, and whether or not the CB has cleared the area yet. Also, grip tightness should have some effect on how quickly the cue re-accelerates after contact between the tip and the CB momentarily slows it down.
So, in short, I don't think you can really name an angle that is the threshold between risking a double-hit and being safe, I think you just have to watch the CB and the tangent line and make the call the way you made it.
-Andrew
Good call
Never heard of the half ball hit thingy. half ball hit? 2/3'rd hit... your judgement was correct for this circumstance.
I've been judging close hits the same way you do for the last 15 years. Never heard anyone say anything about half ball hits... live and learn.
Never heard of the half ball hit thingy. half ball hit? 2/3'rd hit... your judgement was correct for this circumstance.
I've been judging close hits the same way you do for the last 15 years. Never heard anyone say anything about half ball hits... live and learn.
cuetechasaurus said: