It’s a Billiard not a Carom!!!

AtLarge

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
I think I'd enjoy it. Competitive straight pool is about winning, not about high runs, and while the two are obviously related, they are not the same. Runs that end with a miss are not the same as runs that close out a game, and the latter is the greater measure of a champion. I guess the one question I'd raise is whether this approach really does much to ensure that both players get to play. I'm not absolutely sure of it.

Long straight pool races really put me to sleep. I recall attending both the semifinals of the Dragon 14.1 event one year and when I learned that the final would be a race to 300, I decided not to even show up for the final the next day.
Well, with multiple games in a match, each player is highly likely to get at least a couple of innings.

In the Dragon 14.1, the Finals were to 300 points for each of the last 5 events (2015+).

Thanks for your comments. But I doubt we'll ever see the multiple-short-games-per-match format adopted.
 

joelpope

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Evidently it's also hard to describe. Your description of a carom could also apply to a combination. ;)
not really, with a carom, the cue hits object ball #1 into object ball #2 pocketing object ball #1

with a combination the cue ball hits object ball #1 into object ball #2 pocketing object ball #2

2 completely different shots


in a billiard shot the cue ball hits object ball #1 and then the cueball hits and pockets object ball #2
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
not really, with a carom, the cue hits object ball #1 into object ball #2 pocketing object ball #1
...
At carom (pocketless) billiards the object is to make the cue ball hit two balls. I think the use of the term at pool should also mean a shot where the cue ball hits two balls.
 

joelpope

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
At carom (pocketless) billiards the object is to make the cue ball hit two balls. I think the use of the term at pool should also mean a shot where the cue ball hits two balls.
Interesting perspective, I never looked at it as a comparison to "pocketless" billiards. A "Carom" used as a noun is as you described, or, as I described

To "Carom" used as a verb is to strike and rebound, e.g. "he caromed the 3 ball into the side pocket off of the 1 ball."

I guess they all work based on the context.


from Merriam-Webster

Definition of carom​

(Entry 1 of 2)
1a: a shot in billiards in which the cue ball strikes each of two object balls
b: a shot in pool in which an object ball strikes another ball before falling into a pocket
2: a rebounding especially at an angle
 
Last edited:

pt109

WO double hemlock
Gold Member
Silver Member
Language evolves with usage in pool and in every other facet of life.

People refer to shots involving caroms as carom shots, billiard shots, and kiss shots. It's best to just embrace such usage as a normal occurrence. There's no ambiguity here, so what damage is being done?

I recall in another thread, somebody complained that calling a straight pool match a race to 150 (rather than a match to 150 points) was, similarly, in error. In fact, however, this generation of pros, which was raised on nine ball, usually calls a straight pool match a race, and given the evolution of pool terminology, calling a straight pool match a race is fine and completely unambiguous.

While I understand that the most traditional terminology may be what many are most comfortable with, there is no reason to block or reject the continuing evolution of terminology in our game.
I’m with Fran Crimi on the ‘race’ terminology....straight pool is played to a certain number of points.
...otherwise it’ll get confusing when one talks about Shane’s win over Robo at a race to 150.
...and I‘m not going for pool terms evolving....leave it to poolplayers, they’ll devolve......
....these are the people who reply when you ask the score of a match “5-3” and seem surprised when you ask “Who’s got the five?”
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbb

ChrisSjoblom

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
not really, with a carom, the cue hits object ball #1 into object ball #2 pocketing object ball #1

with a combination the cue ball hits object ball #1 into object ball #2 pocketing object ball #2

2 completely different shots


in a billiard shot the cue ball hits object ball #1 and then the cueball hits and pockets object ball #2
I understand that, but his description was vague enough that it applied to both types of shots - caroms and combinations.
 

alphadog

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
At carom (pocketless) billiards the object is to make the cue ball hit two balls. I think the use of the term at pool should also mean a shot where the cue ball hits two balls.
At 3 cushion (pocketless) billiards the object is to make the cue ball hit two balls while including 3 or more cushions. I don't feel the use of the term at pool should also mean sending a object ball of another ball😉
 

evergruven

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
there's nothing wrong with trying to use words correctly. that said, we made all this shit up, so...
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
... from Merriam-Webster ...
For cue sports definitions, I think it's better to refer to a dictionary that is specifically for cue sports. That's Mike Shamos' "Illustrated Encyclopedia of Billiards". He lists references from billiard literature for each term defined.

For "carom" at pocket billiards, Shamos lists both the "cue ball hits two balls" usage and the "OB kisses off another to go in" usage. I'd call the latter a kiss shot. Shamos lists books by Mosconi, Fels, and Balukas for example usages.

1391943._SX318_.jpg
 

sjm

Sweating it at Derby City
Silver Member
...and I‘m not going for pool terms evolving....leave it to poolplayers, they’ll devolve......
....these are the people who reply when you ask the score of a match “5-3” and seem surprised when you ask “Who’s got the five?”
Even pool terms evolved through usage, and while it may be a source of comfort to old timers like you and me to believe otherwise, this generation of pool players is neither smarter nor stupider than pool playing generations past.

Inside and outside of pool, the evolution of language is in the hands of those who use it --- that's why we don't speak in the old English of Shakespeare. Similarly, he didn't adhere to the specifics of language usage in his day. In "As You Like It, "one finds the first ever usage of the term "forever and a day." No doubt, at the time, somebody somewhere probably observed that the accepted usage in such a situation was "forever" and that Shakespeare's use of "forever and a day" was erroneous, but five centuries later, most everyone uses and understands the term "forever and a day."

One is at liberty to ignore the evolution of language, but trying to block it is, more often than not, a fool's errand.
 

CocoboloCowboy

Cowboys are my heros.
Silver Member
This is like arguing best fast food hamburger, Burger King v/s McDonalds.

Personal choice is going to be the one people eat at by choice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sjm

JazzyJeff87

AzB Plutonium Member
Silver Member
We just discussed this and it's neither of those. They're not even in the discussion. 😡
You could throw their respective #1 sides into the hat though. McDonalds has claimed ‘the worlds best fries’ since moses wore short pants but I’d beg to differ. They are good when crispy but don’t hold a candle to the stout fried potatoes employed by BK.

I’ve always considered it a carom when shooting an OB off of another OB and a billiard when you play the CB off an OB into another OB and I’ve heard commentators try to hash this all out as well, with as much success as right here.

I’m pretty sure I’ve done some carom, billiard, combination banks playing 1P.
 

pt109

WO double hemlock
Gold Member
Silver Member
Even pool terms evolved through usage, and while it may be a source of comfort to old timers like you and me to believe otherwise, this generation of pool players is neither smarter nor stupider than pool playing generations past.

Inside and outside of pool, the evolution of language is in the hands of those who use it --- that's why we don't speak in the old English of Shakespeare. Similarly, he didn't adhere to the specifics of language usage in his day. In "As You Like It, "one finds the first ever usage of the term "forever and a day." No doubt, at the time, somebody somewhere probably observed that the accepted usage in such a situation was "forever" and that Shakespeare's use of "forever and a day" was erroneous, but five centuries later, most everyone uses and understands the term "forever and a day."

One is at liberty to ignore the evolution of language, but trying to block it is, more often than not, a fool's errand.
I got no problem with coining new words like the Bard did...but it irritates me when words are misused....
...and may enter the mainstream.
I‘d still rather discuss words with you rather than talk about hamburgers which Coco started in the next post below you.
 

Konrad5288

Active member
This is like me hitting a miscue. I can’t call it a chink anymore for political reasons so I have to call it a chunk. Same thing different name.

In all this is there a proper term for a more than 2 ball combo. An advanced nexus maybe? Nexus would sound better than combo. More professional sounding.
 

sjm

Sweating it at Derby City
Silver Member
I got no problem with coining new words like the Bard did...but it irritates me when words are misused....
...and may enter the mainstream.
I‘d still rather discuss words with you rather than talk about hamburgers which Coco started in the next post below you.
Fair enough, but even words that are not new words come to be used differently as people and the the world around them evolves. In the 19th century, the word pilot referred to the navigator on a ship. Was it mistaken when the term later came to refer to an airplane's navigator? After all, the term pilot referred exclusively to travel on the seas, and today, the term pilot brings up the image of air travel for most. The term pilot once meant one thing and now it means something else. What's wrong with that?

Usage and meaning evolve naturally, and I see this as something to embrace rather than bemoan. That said, it's a matter of opinion for sure, but traditional use of language will always be an option rather than a necessity.
 

alphadog

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Fair enough, but even words that are not new words come to be used differently as people and the the world around them evolves. In the 19th century, the word pilot referred to the navigator on a ship. Was it mistaken when the term later came to refer to an airplane's navigator? After all, the term pilot referred exclusively to travel on the seas, and today, the term pilot brings up the image of air travel for most. The term pilot once meant one thing and now it means something else. What's wrong with that?

Usage and meaning evolve naturally, and I see this as something to embrace rather than bemoan. That said, it's a matter of opinion for sure, but traditional use of language will always be an option rather than a necessity.
I thought on a airline crew ,the navigator was the one not capable of being a pilot?
 

sjm

Sweating it at Derby City
Silver Member
I thought on a airline crew ,the navigator was the one not capable of being a pilot?
Good point.

Actually, in most planes, there is just one of them and the pilot is the navigator. In the case where more than one person is directing the flight, the navigator may be referred to as a co-pilot.
 
Top