FOULS IN POOL ... Everything You Need to Know

dr_dave

Instructional Author
Gold Member
Silver Member
yea anything goes for sure - including the attempted theft of Willie Mosconi's "official record" from bcapl/cseye. They always have clean shirts to play around in oink oink. Definitely some bar rules goin down there I am sorry to report. I aint drankin what they are uh pushin scholarly Dave. Any beverage that the two fellas at bca bar of consumption = strange rules. Under tyhe official rules of Pocket Billiards - not anything goes - much less pigs rollin in slop - if u catch my drift.

I don't think the WPA official rules of pool are perfect, but they are what they are. I think some of the changes CSI/BCAPL has made are certainly in the right direction.
 
Last edited:

Dan Harriman

One of the best in 14.1
Silver Member
Last edited:

Patrick Johnson

Fish of the Day
Silver Member
I am thinkin bout starting a well seasons Sandals Camp, there will be no side spin, no acrodims' just Billiards - nothing foe sale - here, here. Thanks for yer re ply. Adios fer now Scholarly dave. I would only add that when I see a constant reoccurring pattern when I am searching for the surface of truth - hidden beneath politics, I hear it ain't a 'perfect' system, is this an excuse? I say it is. Do you believe in the theater show of this 626 equals unedited truth? It is not meant as a loaded question, also I realize that you go through a company called Vimeo to help you sell and or market your billiard educational dvd's. Do you think schmidt could have sold many dvd's of this 626 through Vimeo advertising?
Do you ever post anything that isn't whining? Not only is Schmidt a better player than you are, he's also a better person.

pj
chgo
 

BRussell

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
One issue that I'd like to whine (ha) a little about is the rules surrounding cue ball fouls only.

At first I liked these rules because it seems kind of nitty for any inadvertent touch of any ball to be a foul. But I’ve come to believe the “cue ball fouls only” rule, and in particular all the exceptions to it, causes more debates and confusion than an “all ball fouls” rule.

The exceptions, where a touched ball is a foul, from CSI rules:
If it’s the cue ball;
If you disturb more than one ball;
If a disturbed ball contacts another ball;
If a ball moves through the space previously occupied by a disturbed ball, within one ball width.

And you can actually pocket a ball by accidentally touching it, and it's not a foul and your opponent has the option to put it back on the table*, which seems crazy to me, especially since so many people play on coin-op tables.
(*unless it’s the game-winning ball, in which case it must be put back on the table.)

What I have found is that most players know that you’re allowed to touch an object ball by accident, but they don’t know all the exceptions - and who can blame them? I’ve seen players knock 3 or 4 balls around while jerking back on a shot, and then get into an argument claiming that touching balls is not a foul.

Even in Dr. Dave's video example of this, the cue ball travels within a few inches of where the moved ball originally sat. It pretty clearly would not have hit it, but without the benefit of rewind, it was close enough that I could see it causing some controversy.

Because of these issues, I’d like to see a move to all-ball-fouls rules. Who's with me?!
 

dr_dave

Instructional Author
Gold Member
Silver Member
One issue that I'd like to whine (ha) a little about is the rules surrounding cue ball fouls only.

At first I liked these rules because it seems kind of nitty for any inadvertent touch of any ball to be a foul. But I’ve come to believe the “cue ball fouls only” rule, and in particular all the exceptions to it, causes more debates and confusion than an “all ball fouls” rule.

The exceptions, where a touched ball is a foul, from CSI rules:
If it’s the cue ball;
If you disturb more than one ball;
If a disturbed ball contacts another ball;
If a ball moves through the space previously occupied by a disturbed ball, within one ball width.

And you can actually pocket a ball by accidentally touching it, and it's not a foul and your opponent has the option to put it back on the table*, which seems crazy to me, especially since so many people play on coin-op tables.
(*unless it’s the game-winning ball, in which case it must be put back on the table.)

What I have found is that most players know that you’re allowed to touch an object ball by accident, but they don’t know all the exceptions - and who can blame them? I’ve seen players knock 3 or 4 balls around while jerking back on a shot, and then get into an argument claiming that touching balls is not a foul.

Even in Dr. Dave's video example of this, the cue ball travels within a few inches of where the moved ball originally sat. It pretty clearly would not have hit it, but without the benefit of rewind, it was close enough that I could see it causing some controversy.

Because of these issues, I’d like to see a move to all-ball-fouls rules. Who's with me?!

I agree with you in principle. However, it seems harsh to penalize somebody if their shirt (or the hair on their head or arm, or a long thread dangling from a sleeve, etc.) barely touches and doesn't move a ball. It seems like that could create many disagreements and bad feelings, especially in a league environment. In a pro tournament with dedicated referees for every match, I think all-ball-fouls is a good idea (despite the potential perception of harshness).

Good topic for discussion,
Dave

PS: What is somebody coughs or sneezes and a ball moves ever so slightly as a result?
 

BRussell

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I agree with you in principle. However, it seems harsh to penalize somebody if their shirt (or the hair on their head or arm, or a long thread dangling from a sleeve, etc.) barely touches and doesn't move a ball. It seems like that could create many disagreements and bad feelings, especially in a league environment. In a pro tournament with dedicated referees for every match, I think all-ball-fouls is a good idea (despite the potential perception of harshness).

Good topic for discussion,
Dave

PS: What is somebody coughs or sneezes and a ball moves ever so slightly as a result?
Yeah, I wonder if it would help or hurt to say moving a ball is a foul, but touching is not.
 

dr_dave

Instructional Author
Gold Member
Silver Member
Yeah, I wonder if it would help or hurt to say moving a ball is a foul, but touching is not.

That would be my favorite implementation of the rule:

It is a foul to touch the CB (when you do not have ball in hand) or to move any OB before or during a shot.

Now we just need to convince the WPA and all league systems to get on board. :geek:
 

dr_dave

Instructional Author
Gold Member
Silver Member
I just added a new section at the end of the rules resource page, where I plan to summarize all rules changes that seem to make sense. Does anybody have any other suggestions for things to put there?

Thanks,
Dave
 

BRussell

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
That would be my favorite implementation of the rule:

It is a foul to touch the CB (when you do not have ball in hand) or to move any OB before or during a shot.

Now we just need to convince the WPA and all league systems to get on board. :geek:
Academic lawyers developed a Model Penal Code to give states something to base their criminal laws on that was well thought-out, rather than the mish-mash of laws that states usually adopt over time. Many states adopted large parts of it when writing their laws. How about a "Model Pool Code?" 😁
 

dr_dave

Instructional Author
Gold Member
Silver Member
Academic lawyers developed a Model Penal Code to give states something to base their criminal laws on that was well thought-out, rather than the mish-mash of laws that states usually adopt over time. Many states adopted large parts of it when writing their laws. How about a "Model Pool Code?" 😁

That's what the WPA rules are meant to be (the "official rules of pool" that everybody should follow). Hopefully, we can get them improved during the next round of revisions to include all the potential improvements identified to date.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Silver Member
It is a foul to touch the CB (when you do not have ball in hand) or to move any OB before or during a shot.
I think that if you are going to do all fouls there is no need to differentiate between what is a foul for the cue ball versus what is a foul for an object ball. To me that makes no sense at all.

And by the "only if it moves" rule, if a player loses control of his cue stick and it clacks down on top of an object ball but the referee does not see the ball move, there is no foul.
 

dr_dave

Instructional Author
Gold Member
Silver Member
It is a foul to touch the CB (when you do not have ball in hand) or to move any OB before or during a shot.
I think that if you are going to do all fouls there is no need to differentiate between what is a foul for the cue ball versus what is a foul for an object ball. To me that makes no sense at all.

I and not recommending "all fouls" here. Touches on an OB are OK as long as the OB does not move.


And by the "only if it moves" rule, if a player loses control of his cue stick and it clacks down on top of an object ball but the referee does not see the ball move, there is no foul.

Agreed. Although, it would be very unlikely for a clacked ball to not move; but if the ball does not move, this would be OK under the new rule. There is a foul only if you disturb the location of an OB. It is OK if your shirt or hair touches an OB, or if your hand touches but does not move an OB, or if the cue touches but does not move an OB. If a ref fails to see a moved OB, there is no foul.
 

BRussell

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
That's what the WPA rules are meant to be (the "official rules of pool" that everybody should follow). Hopefully, we can get them improved during the next round of revisions to include all the potential improvements identified to date.
Right, but the WPA is an official body, whereas the Model Penal Code carries no weight, it is only a set of recommendations by outsiders. The analogy would be to a bunch of pool players on the internet hashing it out and reasoning their way to a set of recommendations that would (maybe?) have a stronger basis than the committees that write the rules for WPA, CSI, etc.
 

dr_dave

Instructional Author
Gold Member
Silver Member
Right, but the WPA is an official body, whereas the Model Penal Code carries no weight, it is only a set of recommendations by outsiders. The analogy would be to a bunch of pool players on the internet hashing it out and reasoning their way to a set of recommendations that would (maybe?) have a stronger basis than the committees that write the rules for WPA, CSI, etc.

This thread could serve as such a "set of recommendations by outsiders." I will also continue to add to the list of suggestions at the bottom of the rules resource page.

Does anybody else have any suggestions for rules improvements to add?
 

Dan Harriman

One of the best in 14.1
Silver Member
This thread could serve as such a "set of recommendations by outsiders." I will also continue to add to the list of suggestions at the bottom of the rules resource page.

Does anybody else have any suggestions for rules improvements to add?
More clarity for our Sports Pocket Billiard Proper Adjudication, i.e. a different "set of recommendations by TRUSTED outsiders". Other than csi/bca's marred recommendation. They are not the only Resource.
 

dr_dave

Instructional Author
Gold Member
Silver Member
This thread could serve as such a "set of recommendations by outsiders." I will also continue to add to the list of suggestions at the bottom of the rules resource page.

Does anybody else have any suggestions for rules improvements to add?
More clarity for our Sports Pocket Billiard Proper Adjudication, i.e. a different "set of recommendations by TRUSTED outsiders". Other than csi/bca's marred recommendation. They are not the only Resource.

Do you or others have other recommendations to add to the list of possible rules changes or improvements?

Thanks.
 

Dan Harriman

One of the best in 14.1
Silver Member
Do you or others have other recommendations to add to the list of possible rules changes or improvements?

Thanks.
Yes - as a matter of fact I do, I would request a different committee to determine if there actually is a chance Mosconi's 526 has indeed been surpassed. Not sure bout fact checkers or Chinese checkers - I prefer Chess. Thanks for your contributions to Pocket Billiards David, I receive no bad vibes from you. As far as the legitimacy of bca's/ 'csi - Mosconi's World Record' - I would like a second opinion - Mosconi's World Record Run of 526 STANDS. Not really trying to jump all over anyone here - I would like to make sure that all pieces of Proper billiard adjudication - are covered.
 

dr_dave

Instructional Author
Gold Member
Silver Member
Yes - as a matter of fact I do, different committee to determine if there actually is a chance Mosconi's 526 has indeed been surpassed. Not sure bout fact checkers or Chinese checkers - I prefer Chess. Thanks for your contributions to Pocket Billiards David, I receive no bad vibes from you. As far as the legitimacy of bca's/csi - Mosconi's record - I would like a second opinion - Mosconi's World Record Run of 526 STANDS. Oh and this one again goes out to Mark Griffin (csi), Charlie wiilliams, scmidt Harriman says - Harry' up with the unedited 626 video.

Based on your posts in other threads (and now this one), you seem to be really determined to diminish John's accomplishment; however, this is not the place for it. BCA "records" have nothing to do with fouls or the official WPA rules of pool.
 

Dan Harriman

One of the best in 14.1
Silver Member
Based on your posts in other threads (and now this one), you seem to be really determined to diminish John's accomplishment; however, this is not the place for it. BCA "records" have nothing to do with fouls or the official WPA rules of pool.
Ok Doctor Dave, I just have one more question. Would you call john's accomplishment - a New World Record of 626?
 
Top