It looks bad and it can be dangerous. At one point launching object balls off the table was not a foul at pool.
New WPA Official Rules of Pool … Learn About All the Changes
- Thread starter dr_dave
- Start date
Agreed. The first time I heard and saw that the CB and an OB could be jumped off the table on purpose to achieve an advantage, I thought it was ridiculous. I still think it is ridiculous, regardless of what some gamblers and tournaments might think. If your opponent can place a ball so deep in their pocket that it can't be extracted, your opponent deserves the advantage, IMO.
At least one object ball?
Currently the WPA one pocket break rules are as simple as you can get: the break shot is like any other BIH shot and governed by the same rules.
I suppose the WPA needs a regulation for the rerack rule since some events play that way and need one.
(In the WPA rules and regulations, the Regulations cover optional ways to do things and dress code and shot clock and other things that are likely to vary or change, while the Rules are supposed to be more permanent.)
Last edited:
I don’t really disagree, but I hate a player making a show of inspecting a rack with his nose like 3” from the balls. I was trying to figure an appropriate penalty but probably was too lenient.
Looking at the pdf, the only thing I'd really recommend (and it's really more layout than actual rules) is that all the sections on the individual games be put together. Having the more general sections on fouls, wheelchair use, and regulations (current sections 6–8) should be before all the game specific sections so it's clear it applies to all of them, while also not having the oddity of some games being before and some after. I figure it was done that way when ten-ball was added to avoid renumbering the existing rules, but with the addition of two new-to-the-WPA-rules games it's time to reorganize them.
Yes, I think it is time to rework the layout. All the game rules should be together. And the section on wheelchair/parasport competition probably belongs in the Regulations. Maybe on the next major revision.
TheRooster
New member
Yes, object ball. That was an oversight. Maybe “legally pocketed” would be another to way to say it. That would also cover the situation — which I forgot — of pocketing an object ball and also scratching. Rules are hard!
See 8.13 Position of Balls.
To make the connection to the definition of "position" in section 8.13 clear, the rules you quoted should say, "it is a foul to play the cue
ball from a position on or below the head string" and "the shot is a foul unless the position of the cue ball crosses the head string before that contact." Additionally, the word "position" in both those rules should be footnoted, with a footnote that says, "See 8.13 Position of balls", so that readers don't have to blindly go searching through the rules looking for a rule that might define when a ball is considered to be behind the head string.
Last edited:
for me the whole ball is extremely easier to determine instead of some darkened area of the base of the ball which is an area where the ball contacts the table not an edge
@TheRooster nice job pointing out the jump cue rule not mentioned in these rules
and your other comparisons with the onepocket.org rules
too bad onepocket.org doesnt get more acknowledgement for their rules which have been the most often set of rules used for at least 20 years
TheRooster
New member
I like this idea. 8.13 clears it up for me. @iusedtoberich have a look.
Kinda funny. The recent announcement of the WPA Athlete's Commission is decently aligned with the concepts of what I was advocating for here. I would alter my recommendation given this development. Instead of putting players directly on the rules committee, I would encourage the rules committee to make use of the Athletes' Commission. At a minimum would be (1) "Hey, we're opening up a revision window. Do you have any suggestions?" and (2) "Here is a draft of our upcoming proposed rule changes for your review and comment."
Given the rules only get updated like every 5-10 years, it would have been nice if this was in place before the most recent rules changes were made. I agree with the recent changes. Smart, qualified people making intelligent decisions in good faith. I just wonder if having this in place first would have been an opportunity to get the most bang-for-our-buck out of this current revision and the next opportunity will be a ways away.
I don't think I've ran into that scenario before, the way that usapl did scoring, unless the game is hill hill, if one of the players reached the point totals the match is over. If it's hill-hill, then the winner of that game wins. Meaning if you need one ball and I need one ball, even if you make that one ball in the game it's not a win, you have to play out the rack. It certainly would be very unfair to the person breaking if they make balls for the other side and they end up winning due to that without even playing.
In my experience, all ball fouls should only be two situations:
1 When a ref is present and watching, and they are the only one authorized to make a call.
2 When you have two players that agree to play that way, because they are both under significantly better than average control of body, hair, cue and clothing while playing, and they trust each other.
The prior WPA rules had it right for the option "may be played" cue ball fouls only when no referee was present, in my opinion.
Beginners, elders and most amateurs are prone to inadvertent ball contact. Apparently the WPA does not want their rules to be a good fit for those VERY large swaths of our pool playing demographic. Pro tournaments -- at least you have pros playing, who are more aware.
The other really big reason not to play all ball fouls without a referee is the distinct and inviting likelihood of an opponent (or maybe a bystander??) making a timely/untimely call and you have NO NEUTRAL PARTY to adjudicate. Did that shirt touch or did it not? It's asking for trouble in my opinion, which presumably is why even the WPA had it as an option for when no ref was present.
Yes, I'm curious about how the discussion went for the removal of cue ball fouls only. Why not share the private discussion?
Thankfully One Pocket still has the option of "cue ball fouls only" in the most "Official" and complete set of One Pocket rules that are available -- those on onepocket.org. And since game rules always trump general rules -- there you go
That's exactly what "all ball fouls" is without a ref. Anyone who has played much under "all ball fouls" out in the real world of typical poolrooms and bars and amateur local tournaments should know that.
I’ve only ever played “cueball fouls only” and you can easily say it’s a source of arguments. You have to explain moving two balls is a foul and people act like you’re a jerk for enforcing it. BCAPL rules is it’s a foul if a moving ball passes within a 7” diameter circle of the original ball position. But nobody knows about that have their own informal concept of whether the disturbed ball “crosses the path of a moving ball”. And it gets dicey if someone disturbs an object ball frozen to the cueball. Or if someone moves a ball back without giving their opponent the opportunity to decide. I’ve seen plenty of arguments in these scenarios where “all ball fouls” would have ended all debate on the topic.That's exactly what "all ball fouls" is without a ref. Anyone who has played much under "all ball fouls" out in the real world of typical poolrooms and bars and amateur local tournaments should know that.
But I can say I’ve never played “all ball fouls” so I can’t comment on how often you get a Lombardo/Frost situation among amateurs. But it doesn’t give me too much sympathy for beer belly contact because it’s already a shame the lengths players will go to avoid using the bridge. So if they touch a ball, it’s still on them for not avoiding it.
I have not seen the arguments you are talking about with cueball fouls only. I agree many players have mistaken ideas of what the rules are, but I would expect many more problems with all ball fouls in CSI/ BCAPL situations with all balls.
Make list of all fouls. Show to complainers.
WinterArcher
Registered
Just went to the WPA website and the new rules are NOT posted there. The PDFs are still for 2016...
The WPA has lots of bureaucracy and things take time, but the files should be updated very soon (hopefully by next week). The changes were approved by the WPA in March! In the mean time, her are the pre-release versions of the files: