One pocket rule question

[hang-the-9]

Why don't people actually go by looking at the shot to see if it's a foul or not?

A situation where it is likely to have a good hit can still have a foul done, and a tough shot to shot clean on can still have a good hit done.

Sounds too much like using astrology and chicken droppings to read the future instead of actually seeing what happens.

I don't want to see pool end up like soccer where the guy with the best acting skill gets the call instead of someone looking at what actually happened.

Chalk width, 1" away, "close to the ball" "not close to the ball", must elevate, must shoot away, none of those actually will prevent or cause a foul, it's how you actually hit the damn shot! LOL

 

[Patrick Johnson]

Why don't people actually go by looking at the shot to see if it's a foul or not?

Because with a shot like this many would get it wrong. I'd rather have an imperfect rule applied consistently than rely on Joe Poolplayer to call it correctly/fairly.

pj
chgo

 

[hang-the-9]

Because with a shot like this many would get it wrong. I'd rather have an imperfect rule applied consistently than rely on Joe Poolplayer to call it correctly/fairly.

pj
chgo

If someone is looking at the hit that does not know how to check for the foul someone else should be called over. I always explain to the person on a shot that looks for a push shot or a double hit what I am looking for the cueball to do, if it does this, it's good, if that, it's bad. I don't tell them how to shoot the shot, but I explain to them and the opponent what I am looking for. That way whatever happens they both see it and both know what is what.

Once you teach a few people, go over some of Dr Daves videos, word should spread to the players in a room about what a legal hit is.

Better to teach the right thing than to toss up hands and go "these people are idiots, it's all a good hit".

I've seen some horribly bad hits called good because of those genera rules. Don't like them, don't think they should be used. I usually use our junior leagues as an example, we teach 8,10,12 year olds on what a legal hit is, adults should be playing to the same standard.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... I usually use our junior leagues as an example, we teach 8,10,12 year olds on what a legal hit is, adults should be playing to the same standard.

Well, yes, but the kids haven't had 20 years of the wrong rules permeating their every pore.

I had one road player tell me after a gross double hit on a ball that was a quarter inch from the cue ball that "you get extra momentum on the ball" when they are that close and it's not a double hit. I think he really believed it.

On the other hand, once when I was a TD and had explained that we were playing the strict rules, Buddy Hall later showed me a close-english shot that was just barely a foul and I said so, then he did an amazing, perfect close english shot. Don't get me started on Mike Sigel, though.

I think it's better to try to educate the players. They will learn pretty quickly who can make reliably correct calls.

And then there is one player in a 14.1 league I used to play in. Even after the fourth or fifth time of discussion with demonstration, he still didn't get it. Maybe I need to work on my demonstrations.:frown:

 

[Patrick Johnson]

By the way, in case it hasn't been said yet, this isn't just a one pocket question - it comes up in all games (except snooker, maybe?).

pj
chgo

 

[Bob Jewett]

By the way, in case it hasn't been said yet, this isn't just a one pocket question - it comes up in all games (except snooker, maybe?).

pj
chgo

If the balls are touching, there's no problem. The players know what's required. When they're a mm apart, the ref has to be on his toes. Intentional miscues are permitted at snooker so that sometimes gives you a way out of a nearly touching ball.