Frozen Cueball to object ball

[Patrick Johnson]

I can make this shot too, but not without obviously pushing the CB.

Oops - I just re-read your description of the shot and (finally) noticed you said it's a 45-60 degree cut angle. I was thinking of the well known push shot at 90 degrees to the rail. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

I'm interested to learn the shot you mentioned, Jay. Is it a "nurse" shot of some kind?

pj
chgo

 

[MattPoland]

I think it comes down to two camps in terms of what the rule ought to be...

One looks at the high-speed video and judges based on what is a clean contact and calls it good.

The other watches a player do it in a game scenario and thinks “I don’t care what the video shows, that’s ugly, stupid and way outside the spirit of shooting pool. There’s no way it should be allowed.”

I think both have merit. I am comfortable playing in either environment. I prefer the 45 degree rule.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[DynoDan]

I would like to see high speed video of what happens when the frozen ball is up against the pack in 14.1. I think THAT is a situation everyone finds questionable. If the frozen ball stands alone (and IS ruled perfectly frozen), no need to jack up unless your object is to stop the CB for position.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I would like to see high speed video of what happens when the frozen ball is up against the pack in 14.1. I think THAT is a situation everyone finds questionable.

I don't think you can shoot that shot center CB with a legal stroke and not foul. The CB has to get trapped against the tip for prolonged or multiple contact.

pj
chgo

 

[Bob Jewett]

...
I think both have merit. I am comfortable playing in either environment. I prefer the 45 degree rule ...

And I prefer fact-based rules.

In his video, Sigel jacks up 30 degrees and hits the cue ball twice and says that's fine. I suppose if the cue ball is up against a bunch of balls but not quite touching and there's a combo coming out the other side of the bunch to a pocket, it's OK, by Mike's reasoning, to jack up and lay into the bunch with a power stroke. You might hit the cue ball three or four times but you were jacked up so it's OK.

I wonder what would happen at DCC if someone did this. It is permitted by the DCC rules.

 

[skip100]

As Bob says, the problem with the 45-degree rule is that it gives the player carte blanche to double hit the cue ball in exactly the situations where people should be finding a stroke and strategy so as not to, you know, double hit the cue ball.

Not to mention that in most league situations the player won't even have to be jacked up to 45 degrees and will still get away with it.

 

[MattPoland]

And I prefer fact-based rules.



In his video, Sigel jacks up 30 degrees and hits the cue ball twice and says that's fine. I suppose if the cue ball is up against a bunch of balls but not quite touching and there's a combo coming out the other side of the bunch to a pocket, it's OK, by Mike's reasoning, to jack up and lay into the bunch with a power stroke. You might hit the cue ball three or four times but you were jacked up so it's OK.



I wonder what would happen at DCC if someone did this. It is permitted by the DCC rules.

LOL. Mike totally double-hit that ball.

Variant 1
Mike seems to be saying any 45 degree angle at all is good enough whether there is a gap or not. That’s a variant that I don’t prefer because it permits double hits. But I get choosing that interpretation for banger-level amateur settings (like a new pool league forming). “If you jack up or shoot away we will circumvent all arguing and call it good even if it might have been bad.” There is an elegance of simplicity to that.

Variant 2
I like the 45 degree rule for frozen balls, but only if you shoot away from the object ball. Jacking up 45 is still shooting into the balls as far as I’m concerned. Now if there’s a gap, I support jacking up but the cueball must draw immediately and not go forward first. I know some scenarios are too close to call and I don’t mind favoring the shooter provided the cueball action is natural.

Fact-based
I agree the rules should be fact-based. I don’t like variant 1 due to permitting obvious double-hits. But variant 2 isn’t incongruent with the facts. It just takes all the same guidance BCA has and adds a choice-based rule to shoot away from frozen balls. Those kinds of choice-based things come up here and there, like requiring a rail-frozen ball to strike a different rail than the one it’s frozen to.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[jay helfert]

But Sigel shot straight through. He was just elevated a little. He was not elevated 45 degrees.

Elevated a little?? What do you call elevated a lot? Maybe straight up in the air, like a full masse shot. If you listen to what Mike says, "Elevate your cue approximately 45 degrees to shoot this shot." His words, not mine.

 

[jay helfert]

I can make this shot too, but not without obviously pushing the CB. I'm betting the same applies to you.


The cue tip only contacts the cue ball once for a push shot. It's still obvious and illegal. Surely you, an experienced tournament ref, know this...?

pj
chgo

I know this but the majority of "tournament" referees I've seen do not.

 

[Bob Jewett]

Elevated a little?? What do you call elevated a lot? Maybe straight up in the air, like a full masse shot. If you listen to what Mike says, "Elevate your cue approximately 45 degrees to shoot this shot." His words, not mine.

Is 30 close enough?

 

[jay helfert]

Oops - I just re-read your description of the shot and (finally) noticed you said it's a 45-60 degree cut angle. I was thinking of the well known push shot at 90 degrees to the rail. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

I'm interested to learn the shot you mentioned, Jay. Is it a "nurse" shot of some kind?

pj
chgo

Call it what you want, but it will take a very good referee to call it a foul. :smile:
I'd be glad to show you how to make this shot sometime and couple of other "legal" shots that you'd enjoy. How about shooting directly through a frozen object ball to make (or even bank) a second object ball? There is a way to aim properly to make this shot.

 

[jay helfert]

Yes, we knew that. Thats why we were asked to write the USA Pool Rules.
Willie Mosconi, Jimmy Caras, Belinda Beardon, Jerry Briesath, Gary Benson and many more over the years were on this committee with me.

Now you are picking on the BCA. They did a good job for many years. The BCA is not an insurance company! They did what they could to keep the pool players alive. The real job of the BCA was to take care of the Retailers, Manufactuers and keep the industry together.

randyg

I was a member of the BCA for over fifteen years, during which time I was very active as a TD for major pool tournaments in this country. You would be hard pressed to find a pro player who did not respect me for the way I ran and officiated the tournaments. Not one time did anyone in the BCA ask me to be on the rules committee. I always wondered why.

 

[jay helfert]

Object ball frozen to the rail one diamond away from the corner pocket. Cue ball frozen to the object ball at a 45-60 degree angle. I can shoot the object ball straight into the corner pocket with one clean stroke.

A common exhibition ‘trick shot’ (at 90 degrees), but, still an illegal ‘push shot’. Trick shot artists entertain spectators with many ‘illegal’ gag shots. I always liked the one where a target moneyball hanger is blocked from the ball-in-play by a close/cockeyed obstructing pair of OBs, setup in such a way that no combination on it is possible, and the shooter quickly jabs the cue through the pack and drops the moneyball so quickly that the illegal second cuetip strike on it isn’t noticed.

You're talking about a different shot then the one I described. On my shot I'm shooting the cue ball in the direction of the pocket, not the object ball.

 

[jay helfert]

LOL. Mike totally double-hit that ball.

Variant 1
Mike seems to be saying any 45 degree angle at all is good enough whether there is a gap or not. That’s a variant that I don’t prefer because it permits double hits. But I get choosing that interpretation for banger-level amateur settings (like a new pool league forming). “If you jack up or shoot away we will circumvent all arguing and call it good even if it might have been bad.” There is an elegance of simplicity to that.

Variant 2
I like the 45 degree rule for frozen balls, but only if you shoot away from the object ball. Jacking up 45 is still shooting into the balls as far as I’m concerned. Now if there’s a gap, I support jacking up but the cueball must draw immediately and not go forward first. I know some scenarios are too close to call and I don’t mind favoring the shooter provided the cueball action is natural.

Fact-based
I agree the rules should be fact-based. I don’t like variant 1 due to permitting obvious double-hits. But variant 2 isn’t incongruent with the facts. It just takes all the same guidance BCA has and adds a choice-based rule to shoot away from frozen balls. Those kinds of choice-based things come up here and there, like requiring a rail-frozen ball to strike a different rail than the one it’s frozen to.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Matt, two very different things happen when this shot is hit properly at approx. a 45 degree angle, and when it's not. Hit properly, the cue ball rolls forward slowly a short distance and stops. If it's hits straight through (BCA rules) the cue ball will follow the object ball forward at a much higher rate of speed and travel much farther before stopping. Sometimes almost as far as the object ball. You don't need a video to see this.

 

[MattPoland]

Matt, two very different things happen when this shot is hit properly at approx. a 45 degree angle, and when it's not. Hit properly, the cue ball rolls forward slowly a short distance and stops. If it's hits straight through (BCA rules) the cue ball will follow the object ball forward at a much higher rate of speed and travel much farther before stopping. Sometimes almost as far as the object ball. You don't need a video to see this.

When shooting towards a frozen ball.

(A) Level Full Draw: Cueball pops up from the miscue because the inertia of the object ball causes your stick to scoop the cueball. I think we all agree that’s a trash shot.

After that it’s all the same to me.

(B) Level Stop Shot: Cueball races down table at nearly the same speed as the object ball. This is a trash shot too when you see it.

(C) Jacked Up Draw Show: Cueball shoves forward perhaps one diamond and then the backspin bites and stops. This doesn’t look like trash when you see it.

(D) Level Cue One Tip Draw: Cueball shoves forward like 5-6 diamonds and then backspin bites and cueball stops. This looks nearly as trashy as (B).

The different between (A) and (B/C/D) is the miscue. The difference between (B) and (C/D) is that (B) doesn’t bite. The difference between (C) and (D) is merely WHEN the backspin bites. They are all the same trash shot. (C) just looks less ugly.

EDIT: Video

https://youtu.be/P8gQN1pAsm0

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Call it what you want, but it will take a very good referee to call it a foul. :smile:
I'd be glad to show you how to make this shot sometime and couple of other "legal" shots that you'd enjoy. How about shooting directly through a frozen object ball to make (or even bank) a second object ball? There is a way to aim properly to make this shot.

I assume you’re talking about Bob Jewett’s “two times fuller” method. Yes, it’s pretty accurate when hit right.

pj
chgo

 

[goettlicher]

I was a member of the BCA for over fifteen years, during which time I was very active as a TD for major pool tournaments in this country. You would be hard pressed to find a pro player who did not respect me for the way I ran and officiated the tournaments. Not one time did anyone in the BCA ask me to be on the rules committee. I always wondered why.

Great question! Why?

randyg

 

[DynoDan]

I don't think you can shoot that shot center CB with a legal stroke and not foul. The CB has to get trapped against the tip for prolonged or multiple contact.

pj
chgo

Only high-speed/slow-mo video examination could finally settle it. Whether the tip gets ‘trapped’ for an extended time really isn’t the issue, since the manner of stroke & number of tip contacts are what the rules specify (?). If the pack balls are all frozen to each other, then a truly legal ‘stroke’ (not ‘push’) with a loose grip should cause all contacting balls to move in unison, while the cue rebounds (?). Too firm a grip might technically be construed as a ‘push’, since the total mass of frozen pack balls would constitute unusually excessive resistance. Some might elect to jack up when frozen if calling a dead combo hidden in the pack, just to spare the referee from controversy, though positioning/shape circumstances might dictate each individual situation (?)

 

[DynoDan]

...whether the tip gets ‘trapped’ for an extended time really isn’t the issue....

P.S. I should likely be more specific. What I meant to imply, is that since a ‘pack’ or ‘line’ of frozen balls constitutes so much more mass than a single frozen OB, the degree of tip compression (and thus time-of-contact before release) should logically be expected to also be much more (?), even with the same normal (legal) stroke. My old BCA rulebook doesn’t use the word ‘trapped’ (“maintained contact”/“momentary time”/etc.). But, I think no ref could justifiably accuse you of ‘pushing’ if your grip is obviously loose (open palm)?

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I think no ref could justifiably accuse you of ‘pushing’ if your grip is obviously loose (open palm)?

The rules don't say anything about your grip, only the length of contact time. More than normal = push foul.

For instance, here's the WPA rule:

6.8 Push Shot

It is a foul to prolong tip-to-cue-ball contact beyond that seen in normal shots.

pj
chgo