Novel use of bridge or rules violation?

[hang-the-9]

Pretty sure everyone understands that. My point is that while it’s illegal, it’s not a big deal. Based on the wording in the OP, I could put together a decent argument for it being within the rules. I’d never call my opponent for that. What’s your opinion on the point made a few posts back about a glove elevating a bridge hand?

By how much a glove would elevate the hand you would have to start looking at things like smudges on the balls being used for a no contact foul since the balls did not really touch, but touched the dirt. The extra height is a matter of the cloth used, which is more or less 0, the glove is still used as a glove. If you stuffed padding in the glove to elevate your hand, that should not be allowed.

 

[Bob Jewett]

Actually, the WPA rules do not clearly forbid the use of the bridge as Oscar and Kyren used it. The wording is not perfectly clear. Trust me on that one.

The wording is more clear in the BCAPL rules.

Whether the Oscar/Kyren use should be permitted at pool is another matter. It seems to be OK in snooker.

It is very rare for a pool table to have a good set of bridges available if you compare them to what is available on the typical snooker match table. One argument for allowing creative use of the bridge stick is to make up for the failure of the room/promoter/equipment supplier to provide an adequate set of bridges.

As for the suggestion that only one bridge should be allowed, until pool tables get spiders and swan's necks I think that's a really bad idea. Those who haven't seen the Russo Interlocking Bridge Head should check it out.

If the goal is to outlaw "innovative" uses, then I think the rules have to be even more explicit than the BCAPL rules. For example they could say, in part: "The mechanical bridge may only touch the player's bridge hand, a second bridge if one is used, the player's supported cue stick and the table and may not touch any other part of the player's body or any other object. At the instant of tip-to-ball contact the player must not touch the half of the bridge nearest the bridge head and the bridge head must be touching the table."

I suppose bridge heads need to have an equipment approval process. Maybe bridge handles as well.

Bob Jewett
Chief Editor, WPA World Standardized Rules

 

[BuddyWing]

You HATE 'Earl" don't you....
HaHa

 

[Nick B]

Actually, the WPA rules do not clearly forbid the use of the bridge as Oscar and Kyren used it. The wording is not perfectly clear. Trust me on that one.

The wording is more clear in the BCAPL rules.

Whether the Oscar/Kyren use should be permitted at pool is another matter. It seems to be OK in snooker.

It is very rare for a pool table to have a good set of bridges available if you compare them to what is available on the typical snooker match table. One argument for allowing creative use of the bridge stick is to make up for the failure of the room/promoter/equipment supplier to provide an adequate set of bridges.

As for the suggestion that only one bridge should be allowed, until pool tables get spiders and swan's necks I think that's a really bad idea. Those who haven't seen the Russo Interlocking Bridge Head should check it out.

If the goal is to outlaw "innovative" uses, then I think the rules have to be even more explicit than the BCAPL rules. For example they could say, in part: "The mechanical bridge may only touch the player's bridge hand, a second bridge if one is used, the player's supported cue stick and the table and may not touch any other part of the player's body or any other object. At the instant of tip-to-ball contact the player must not touch the half of the bridge nearest the bridge head and the bridge head must be touching the table."

I suppose bridge heads need to have an equipment approval process. Maybe bridge handles as well.

Bob Jewett
Chief Editor, WPA World Standardized Rules

Bob,
Snooker also has the advantage of having more bridge choices. Kyren you'll notice used a spider bridge which is taller than a standard bridge (remember they use smaller X-Bridges on snooker tour) which along with the rail height makes for a nice platform.

 

[BuddyWing]

Sorry Bob I meant that for Hang the nine

 

[PhilosopherKing]

By how much a glove would elevate the hand you would have to start looking at things like smudges on the balls being used for a no contact foul since the balls did not really touch, but touched the dirt. The extra height is a matter of the cloth used, which is more or less 0, the glove is still used as a glove. If you stuffed padding in the glove to elevate your hand, that should not be allowed.

rules are rules, right?

do you think a glove and this use of the bridge were considered when the rules were written?

 

[Bob Jewett]

Sorry Bob I meant that for Hang the nine

No problem, Buddy, but I think Earl is skating on thin ice with the finger splints. I'm not so sure about the butt weights and thick, heavy shoes.:wink:

 

[hang-the-9]

rules are rules, right?

do you think a glove and this use of the bridge were considered when the rules were written?

The huge difference is that you are using the glove the way it was made to be used. It raising your hand .01 mm is secondary. And yes someone using the bridge across the table like that was very likely though about, but since I was not there, no way to know. It's in the rules now.

 

[oldzilla]

No problem, Buddy, but I think Earl is skating on thin ice with the finger splints. I'm not so sure about the butt weights and thick, heavy shoes.:wink:

I believe Earl is over the line with his finger things !!! :yeah:

I made a hand bridge once. Hand held to jack up your bridge hand.
I was told it was illegal right away from tournament directors !

It's like you are creating a better lie in golf.
Remember Stadler and the towel.
His lie wasn't much better.
He just wanted to keep his pants clean !

 

[PhilosopherKing]

The huge difference is that you are using the glove the way it was made to be used. It raising your hand .01 mm is secondary. And yes someone using the bridge across the table like that was very likely though about, but since I was not there, no way to know. It's in the rules now.

using a bridge as a different kind of bridge, but a bridge nonetheless, isn't using it as it was meant to be used?

a bridge bridges.

 

[Bob Jewett]

I believe Earl is over the line with his finger things !!! :yeah:

I made a hand bridge once. Hand held to jack up your bridge hand.
I was told it was illegal right away from tournament directors !

It's like you are creating a better lie in golf.
Remember Stadler and the towel.
His lie wasn't much better.
He just wanted to keep his pants clean !

On the other hand.... Some tables have nasty, gummy, sticky pocket liners. If you make a normal rail bridge over those pockets, your stick comes away with black, sticky mung on it. To avoid that, you can put a paper towel, or a hand towel if you carry one, draped over the pocket liner. Some people will call a foul for that. I feel the foul should be called on the table.

 

[sbpoolleague]

A glove elevates a player's bridge hand.

Nice try but no. Once you wear a glove it becomes part of your hand. If you have ball in hand and you place the cue ball with the gloved hand and your glove touches an object ball, it's a foul even though technically your hand did not touch the object ball.

I actually had a similar ruling given to me by Bill Stock when he was still at CSI. One of the players in my league likes to lay down a napkin on the metal corners of Valley tables when hitting rail shots so that he does not scratch his cue. Someone called a foul on him for "improving his bridge hand". Bill Stock said "hogwash" (not really, he just said that it would be allowed).

 

[marek]

Actually, the WPA rules do not clearly forbid the use of the bridge as Oscar and Kyren used it. The wording is not perfectly clear. Trust me on that one.

As for the suggestion that only one bridge should be allowed, until pool tables get spiders and swan's necks I think that's a really bad idea. Those who haven't seen the Russo Interlocking Bridge Head should check it out.

Bob Jewett
Chief Editor, WPA World Standardized Rules

Bob..i dont know if you are aware of this but WPA referees regularly attend training courses where they are taught how those special situations which dont have 100% exact wording in WPA rules/regulations are to be decided. I asked EPBF (branch of WPA) referee very specifically about this very bridge situation and got very exact answer about ruling which I posted here. You above all the people here know very well that the rules are not perfectly written and those grey areas need explanation. And WPA provides these explanations via their referees. And one of them I posted here. Nothing more, nothing less. I know that WPA doesnt get much respect on US soil (mostly because BCA=branch of WPA on US soil doesnt give a damn..) and that there are many sets of rules over the pond. So if you guys want to bend the rules or use different set of rules,thats all fine with me. But for those who want to adhere to WPA rules the answer is simple: hand on the bridge use is illegal. End of story.

 

[terryhanna]

I believe Earl is over the line with his finger things !!! :yeah:

I made a hand bridge once. Hand held to jack up your bridge hand.
I was told it was illegal right away from tournament directors !

It's like you are creating a better lie in golf.
Remember Stadler and the towel.
His lie wasn't much better.
He just wanted to keep his pants clean !

Ya think :shrug:

 

[TRWpool]

On the other hand.... Some tables have nasty, gummy, sticky pocket liners. If you make a normal rail bridge over those pockets, your stick comes away with black, sticky mung on it. To avoid that, you can put a paper towel, or a hand towel if you carry one, draped over the pocket liner. Some people will call a foul for that. I feel the foul should be called on the table.

Bob, Im sure you know, this was something Grady used to do to even out the ridge between the pocket liner and the rail on Brunswick Gold Crown 1s, 2s, and 3s He did this often.

Tom

 

[Bob Jewett]

... So if you guys want to bend the rules or use different set of rules,thats all fine with me. But for those who want to adhere to WPA rules the answer is simple: hand on the bridge use is illegal. End of story.

Well, no, it's not the end of the story. If the WPA wants to establish a set of rules interpretations for all WPA members to use, that would be fine. I think that would be a good idea. In the mean time, I suppose the EPBF is free to form such a set of interpretations that it does not share with other regions.

Or perhaps I've missed the section on the WPA website that covers rules interpretations and "decisions in action". Do you know of one?

 

[cueman]

My road bridge has a tall head on it and I use it for resting my hand on it to shoot over a ball. It is designed for that. That also can be used to rest your hand for jumping. Hold the handle up vertical and use it for masse support. Now if the manufacturer had those things in mind i would think it is intended purpose and legal.

 

[Bob Jewett]

My road bridge has a tall head on it and I use it for resting my hand on it to shoot over a ball. It is designed for that. That also can be used to rest your hand for jumping. Hold the handle up vertical and use it for masse support. Now if the manufacturer had those things in mind i would think it is intended purpose and legal.

In general an innovation by a manufacturer is not automatically allowed in play. It may be absolutely obvious what the intent is, but that doesn't make it legal.

 

[PhilosopherKing]

Ya think :shrug:

View attachment 481604

how's it different from wearing glasses?

 

[marek]

Well, no, it's not the end of the story. If the WPA wants to establish a set of rules interpretations for all WPA members to use, that would be fine. I think that would be a good idea. In the mean time, I suppose the EPBF is free to form such a set of interpretations that it does not share with other regions.

Or perhaps I've missed the section on the WPA website that covers rules interpretations and "decisions in action". Do you know of one?

Its not just about EBPF, WPA referees in fact have their own board where they discuss all these grey rule areas. They come up with rule interpretation which are then binding and are spread through the WPA referees to WPA member federations. And as BCA apparently doesnt do its job then its only logical that USA doesnt get these rule interpretations applied or even known which is truly sad :frown: