is this legal?

Looks illegal to me, with or without the chalk being used to 'level' the illegally used bridge.

I wonder if it would be ok to place two bridges(without chalk levelers) across the rails, next to each other, with the bridge heads on opposite rails, located such that the 'crotch' of the two bridge sticks could hold your cue shaft in a controllable spot, to shoot the shot.

Probably not though if using the WPA referenced rule, since the bridge(s) are not being used in the intended fashion(bridgehead assisting), but rather as a suspended support for your bridge hand.

If gambling....build an erector set with bridges, cue racks and mop handles, and cue holder clippy things that look like potato chip bag clamps and hope it doesn't all fall on more than one ball.:D
 
I would say can't do this.

Rule is:

Mechanical Bridges – The player may use up to two mechanical bridges to support the cue stick during the shot.

He is clearly not supporting the cue stick on the shot but his bridge hand.

Plus it's clearly outside of what the equipment was made to do.

Very creative though, I would never have though of that way to get over a ball.
 
2014 CSI Rules BCAPL

Here is the rule on bridges and chalk and from this I would say it is NOT Legal


d. You may not shoot while using more than two mechanical bridges at any one time. A bridge may only be used to support the cue or another bridge. If two bridges are used, the upper bridge must rest on the head of the lower bridge. (AR p. 73).

e. You may not shoot while using any item to support or elevate your bridge hand. You may hold chalk in your bridge hand while bridging, but the chalk may not be used to elevate your hand off the table.


Penalty for (d-e): foul upon execution of the shot. If no shot is executed then there is no foul.
 
Rules spelled out

The next time someone complains about rules in billiards....maybe it's that they're spelled out....maybe it's some obscure rule that someone thinks wouldn't ever apply....just point them to this steaming pile of nonsense.

It's jackassory for the sake of it.
 
If I'm the ref, I would allow the unusual use of the bridge, but not the chalk. I've seen bridges used in some crazy but effective ways.
 
Jay...as the ref, are you interpreting that the intended use of a bridge(s) is more to aid a player in bridging for an obstructed shot, as opposed to using the bridge(s) to support the cue shaft in making an obstructed shot?

If the former, wouldn't the finger stilts be allowed to aid the hand bridging in obstructive situations...? Is this a case of bridge vs stilts? One with a conventional useage/but modified, vs another nonconventional method to do the same thing. Seems if one is not allowed, neither should the other.

Agreed...creative use of handy materials.
 
I don't think this construction is very stable, at least not for normal body weight distribution on the bridgehand.
 
A different answer is that the management should provide various bridges of various shapes like they do for snooker. This shot wants the "swan's neck".

rests.jpg
 
I agree with BRussel:

1.3 Player’s Use of Equipment
The equipment must meet existing WPA equipment specifications. In general, players are not permitted to introduce novel equipment into the game. The following uses, among others, are considered normal. If the player is uncertain about a particular use of equipment, he should discuss it with the tournament management prior to the start of play. The equipment must be used only for the purpose or in the manner that the equipment was intended. (See 6.16 Unsportsmanlike Conduct.)
(a) Cue Stick – The player is permitted to switch between cue sticks during the match, such as break, jump and normal cues. He may use either a built-in extender or an add-on extender to increase the length of the stick.
(b) Chalk – The player may apply chalk to his tip to prevent miscues, and may use his own chalk, provided its color is compatible with the cloth.
(c) Mechanical Bridges – The player may use up to two mechanical bridges to support the cue stick during the shot. The configuration of the bridges is up to the player. He may use his own bridge if it is similar to standard bridges.
(d) Gloves – The player may use gloves to improve the grip and/or bridge hand function.
(e) Powder – A player is allowed to use powder in a reasonable amount as determined by the referee.
Click to expand...

The guy in the picture is using the bridge to support his hand not the cue.
 
Perhaps a rule revision could specify that the bridge shall replace the bridge hand.
 
krupa said:
I agree with BRussel:



The guy in the picture is using the bridge to support his hand not the cue.
Click to expand...
The cue is ultimately supported (on his hand), so there is an argument that the cue is being supported. There is no language that says the cue must be "directly" supported. So this "indirect" supporting doesn't seem too far afoul of this portion of the rule.

-td
 
td873 said:
The cue is ultimately supported (on his hand), so there is an argument that the cue is being supported. There is no language that says the cue must be "directly" supported. So this "indirect" supporting doesn't seem too far afoul of this portion of the rule.

-td
Click to expand...

I'm wary of interpretation in game rules (pool or otherwise), the rule states "support the cue stick" so that's what I'm going with. The guy is clearly using the bridge stick to support his hand above the table.

Guess we'll agree to disagree.
 
krupa said:
I'm wary of interpretation in game rules (pool or otherwise), the rule states "support the cue stick" so that's what I'm going with. The guy is clearly using the bridge stick to support his hand above the table.

Guess we'll agree to disagree.
Click to expand...
So if the player put the cue stick down on the shaft of the bridge and then kept it in position side-to-side with his fingers it would be OK?
 
Bob Jewett said:
So if the player put the cue stick down on the shaft of the bridge and then kept it in position side-to-side with his fingers it would be OK?
Click to expand...

It would be better, I suppose, but I still don't think it's using the equipment as intended. If I were a ref at a tournament (don't worry, no one's called me in yet ;)), that would be my call and I would stand by it.
 
Without question, it is illegal. Splitting hairs and looking for alternate definitions still won't make it legal. It's not what the equipment was intended to do.
 
Last edited:
I have a ton of respect for both Bob and Fran .
I wonder if Bob feels the same way friend does?
 
alphadog said:
I have a ton of respect for both Bob and Fran .
I wonder if Bob feels the same way friend does?
Click to expand...
As I noted above, the problem starts when the room/TD/promoter fail to provide adequate bridges. Many rooms only have the metal-head bridges with the flash unsmoothed and ready to gouge into your shaft if you are careless enough to use such a bridge. I like the Russo bridge mentioned earlier but they are scarce.

If the management has failed to provide proper bridges, I personally have no problem with what the OP showed except for the chalk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top