Did Ortmann foul? Bustamante says Yes!

[HelloBaby-]

Off topic, but anybody trusts his eyes that much, try this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CEr2GfGilw


What do you see ?

Did she turn clock-wise ?

Did she turn counter clock-wise ?

Did she switch direction ?

What if I tell you all the answers can be YES.

And this one is for fun, Optical Illusions
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RC1fd0Nqh34

 

[jay helfert]

In slo-mo you can see the six move first. On this one you must rely on the call of the referee. If he's not in position to make the call or calls a good hit then you have to abide by his call, UNLESS! Unless the TD rules you can review it on video. In that case the referee and the TD get a second chance to make the call.

It was a foul but very hard to see and determine by an untrained eye or an out of position referee.

 

[9Ballr]

They could of done same thing amd stopped at contact. Amd seen it clearly.

"...could HAVE done THE same thing..."

 

[Eurotroll]

It was foul, no doubt. The cueball after the impact tells all... and Bustamante knows it very well since this day https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fjZwwgRp44 minute 2:00 , watch 1 minute more

 

[PoolBum]

"...could HAVE done THE same thing..."

Good luck trying to correct "could of" to "could have" here on AZB. You'll spend your whole day correcting people.

 

[westcoast]

Do you guys think Ortmann knew he fouled and tried to play it off or truly didn't know? It happened so fast and was quite close- I wonder if he knew or not.

 

[Double-Dave]

The draw is not in that direction. In your scenario the cue ball would have come back towards him and instead it went close to perpendicular to the path of the 13.

It would be interesting to set up the same shot and see the hits with high speed video.

I agree with you that the path of the cueball seems "off" from what a good hit would produce,
but how do you explain the speed of the 6 ball? If it was a foul he would have just barely grazed
the 6 but it got quite a bit of speed.

gr. Dave

 

[Bob Jewett]

I agree with you that the path of the cueball seems "off" from what a good hit would produce,
but how do you explain the speed of the 6 ball? If it was a foul he would have just barely grazed
the 6 but it got quite a bit of speed.

gr. Dave

I think the speed of the six looks too high because of the viewing angle of the video. Sometimes the view from the end of the table makes easy shots look impossible. It would have been nice to have had an overhead view. It would be possible but tedious to set up the positions of the balls and do a better analysis.

I suppose it is possible that it was a true split hit. (The video does not have a high enough frame rate to determine whether it was or not, as pointed out previously.) It's just very, very unlikely. I don't know where the cue ball would have gone on a true simultaneous hit.

Here's a true split hit you can try for yourself:



Draw the cue ball straight back by hitting the two object balls simultaneously.

This situation is easy to analyze for where the cue ball will go on a simultaneous hit. The one on the video is not easy to analyze because we don't have good data on where the balls are.

 

[asbani]

1:05:00 in the video is a foul, Ortmann hit the 6 ball first, it's so obvious by the reaction of the cueball, if you know pocket billiards you would know that its a 6ball first without even slow motion, cueball reaction says it all.