I have mentioned this before. With a really bad back, the most painful part for me is racking.I'd rather break a slug rack than go through all that effort of racking after a win. Not racking is the reward for winning. Loser racks, and slugs beget slugs. My rack will always be as perfect as humanly possible for an opponent. If they don't respect the game enough to return the favor, then I stop caring how their rack is as much. I won't intentionally slug them but I sure won't show much care if I'm "gifted" a slug.
Ironically (and probably stupidly) I pay more attention to getting a perfect rack for my opponent than on rack your own. Balls will break either way, you just gotta adapt to the rack at hand. In a tournament, I'll look at the rack if my opponent racks, but I won't say a word. I'll break it accordingly. Pool is a mental game. Use the energy to your advantage and don't just stew over it.
Another truly ridiculous shot that I'm pretty sure was outlawed long ago was the intentional double hit of the cue ball in the process of pocketing a ball leaning over opponent's pocket. My understanding is that, under today's rules, the ball still counts for opponent unless the cue ball is also pocketed.As someone else has pointed out, the wording, as posted, is ambiguous. We sort of know what they are getting at, and maybe it will always be clear during play, and maybe the long-form rules will be clear, but they really should fix it. Maybe something like:
If you pocket a ball in your opponent's pocket, the ball counts for him unless you also pocket the cue ball. If you knock a ball near your opponent's pocket off the table, it counts for him.
("Near" is slightly ambiguous.) The above leaves a third possible shot that is maybe too unlikely to worry about: you play a take out by jumping the cue ball into the hung object ball which hits the back of the pocket and goes up-table while the cue ball hits your opponent's backer in the third row.
Related to which, there used to be a player at the rec center named "Mean Al". If there was a bystander near the table who bothered him, he would play position on a shot so he could send the cue ball towards the guy's tender parts. He was real accurate. Once he bet that he could hit the electric clock on the wall that was seven feet up. I don't know how many tries he got but the clock was gone.
I think that if there is any foul on the shot other than pocketing the cue ball, the opponent gets the ball. The shot has to be clean except for the pocket scratch.Another truly ridiculous shot that I'm pretty sure was outlawed long ago was the intentional double hit of the cue ball in the process of pocketing a ball leaning over opponent's pocket. My understanding is that, under today's rules, the ball still counts for opponent unless the cue ball is also pocketed.
You missed one.This is why the world is overrun with lawyers. Nothing is black or white......it's all gray.
I think that they've updated the language:As someone else has pointed out, the wording, as posted, is ambiguous. We sort of know what they are getting at, and maybe it will always be clear during play, and maybe the long-form rules will be clear, but they really should fix it. Maybe something like:
If you pocket a ball in your opponent's pocket, the ball counts for him unless you also pocket the cue ball. If you knock a ball near your opponent's pocket off the table, it counts for him.
("Near" is slightly ambiguous.) The above leaves a third possible shot that is maybe too unlikely to worry about: you play a take out by jumping the cue ball into the hung object ball which hits the back of the pocket and goes up-table while the cue ball hits your opponent's backer in the third row.
Related to which, there used to be a player at the rec center named "Mean Al". If there was a bystander near the table who bothered him, he would play position on a shot so he could send the cue ball towards the guy's tender parts. He was real accurate. Once he bet that he could hit the electric clock on the wall that was seven feet up. I don't know how many tries he got but the clock was gone.
Reminds me of my younger days:... there used to be a player at the rec center named "Mean Al". If there was a bystander near the table who bothered him, he would play position on a shot so he could send the cue ball towards the guy's tender parts. He was real accurate. ...
Why not ball in hand anywhere instead of behind the line as mentioned in situation above? That should speed it up.That's why you eliminate rack your own.
I agree, the matches need to move faster.
I think ball in hand anywhere would be to big of a penalty. It would certainly speed things up, though.Why not ball in hand anywhere instead of behind the line as mentioned in situation above? That should speed it up.
And make intentional fouls less likely.I think ball in hand anywhere would be to big of a penalty. It would certainly speed things up, though.
Problem is incoming player comes in and walks around scratching his ass , goes up and down as if to shoot 2 or 3 times , places his hand where he is thinking of leaving the cueball , and 5 minutes later says "shoot again". Then the guy who fouled bumps whitey 1 inch and takes a second foul and process repeats. No thanks.What I’ve always wanted to see at one pocket and straight pool....shoot again option after a foul.
I think that would speed up the game...and it’s an extremely fair rule.
That would be a huge change to a game where players frequently take intentionals. At 14.1 you can do almost the equivalent by taking an intentional after your opponent fouls, but you can make the shot even harder.What I’ve always wanted to see at one pocket and straight pool....shoot again option after a foul.
I think that would speed up the game...and it’s an extremely fair rule.
Sadly, that wording is still broken. They need to get a lawyer or something to help them with exact, clear wording. Of course just being a lawyer won't help, but at least they have courses for law students about saying what you mean in English.I think that they've updated the language:
Ball Jumped Off the Table Collapse
If the cue ball or an object ball is jumped off the table to prevent an object ball from counting toward the opponents ball count, the object ball will go in the opponents pocket and count toward their ball count and it is a foul and cue ball in hand in the kitchen for the opponent.
Trapping or Wedging the Cue Ball Collapse
It is a foul if a player deliberately traps or wedges the cue ball in the jaw of a pocket. In addition to the foul penalty, the opponent receives cue ball in hand behind the head string.
You just have to think differently when you push....not unlike the Texas Express 9-ball push.That would be a huge change to a game where players frequently take intentionals. At 14.1 you can do almost the equivalent by taking an intentional after your opponent fouls, but you can make the shot even harder.
Intentionals are part of the game. You don't need to do away them to speed the game up.And make intentional fouls less likely.
And those matches are real good too.The match was Frost v Schmidt from the last onep tourney held at California Billiards Mountain View around 13 or 14. Should be on youtube, Fast Lenny was the creator.
Seen Lassiter play a match at Jansco's where he intentionally did the 3 scratch/rerack/foul-at least twice in one game to 125.That would be a huge change to a game where players frequently take intentionals. At 14.1 you can do almost the equivalent by taking an intentional after your opponent fouls, but you can make the shot even harder.