One Pocket Rules Question

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
It's possible for a frozen ball to unfreeze on its own if the cloth is pitted. Like, maybe the ball on the spot settles into the crater the nine ball players created. I think the general rule for a ball settling is that it is an accepted hazard of the game and nothing is done unless the settling causes a ball to fall into a pocket.

For this particular situation I think that as soon as a shot has been taken after the spotting, you have to leave the ball alone if you are going to play by the rules.
 
Last edited:

lfigueroa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
It's possible for a frozen ball to unfreeze on its own if the cloth is pitted. Like, maybe the ball on the spot settles into the crater the nine ball players created. I think the general rule for a ball settling is that it is an accepted hazard of the game and nothing is done unless the settling causes a ball to fall into a pocket.

For this particular situation I think that as soon as a shot has been taken after the spotting, you have to leave the ball alone if you are going to play by the rules.

Bob, really?

You are obviously not a 1pocket player. Of all the guys I've played over the years I can only think of *one guy* who would be such a nit as to not freeze the balls a shot or two later, ref or no ref.

Lou Figueroa
 

Hits 'em Hard

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Bob, really?

You are obviously not a 1pocket player. Of all the guys I've played over the years I can only think of *one guy* who would be such a nit as to not freeze the balls a shot or two later, ref or no ref.

Lou Figueroa
And there is no rule that states once a spotted ball is properly back in play, frozen to a ball, that the ball must remain frozen to that ball. And only a nit would argue that it should be refrozen.
 

lfigueroa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
And there is no rule that states once a spotted ball is properly back in play, frozen to a ball, that the ball must remain frozen to that ball. And only a nit would argue that it should be refrozen.

Yes, like Alex and JJ.

Lou Figueroa
 

Hits 'em Hard

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Yes, like Alex and JJ.

Lou Figueroa
If the ball was never frozen in the first place, that’s a little bit a different subject to argue about. But you’re saying that if we’re playing and a ball is spotted and froze to an adjoining ball and we agree on that. Then two turns later it’s not frozen and you’re wanting to refreeze it. That’s fucking bullshit, and you know it.
 

lfigueroa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
If the ball was never frozen in the first place, that’s a little bit a different subject to argue about. But you’re saying that if we’re playing and a ball is spotted and froze to an adjoining ball and we agree on that. Then two turns later it’s not frozen and you’re wanting to refreeze it. That’s fucking bullshit, and you know it.

I'm talking about what's being discussed in this thread: the situation in the video in the OP.

Lou Figueroa
 

Biloxi Boy

Man With A Golden Arm
I think the general rule for a ball settling is that it is an accepted hazard of the game and nothing is done unless the settling causes a ball to fall into a pocket.

For this particular situation I think that as soon as a shot has been taken after the spotting, you have to leave the ball alone if you are going to play by the rules.
This is an absolutely correct analysis and statement. The point at which things become final, or certain, etc., is a critical concept in most systems of rules. Otherwise, we are left in a constant state of flux, wholly unable to determine our position or status. Rules aside, two consenting persons may agree to play by any arrangements they might desire. However, the fact that some folks agree to play outside the rules does not confer upon them the right to criticize those who choose . . .
 

Black-Balled

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
It's possible for a frozen ball to unfreeze on its own if the cloth is pitted. Like, maybe the ball on the spot settles into the crater the nine ball players created.
That's what came to my mind...shooting a spotted ball out of the divot at slow speed is a bit of an adventure.
 

bbb

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
That's what came to my mind...shooting a spotted ball out of the divot at slow speed is a bit of an adventure.
i had 2 balls on the spot the other day
went to shoot the front ball into my pocket and it jumped into the air to get out of the divot..... 😱
 

Black-Balled

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
i had 2 balls on the spot the other day
went to shoot the front ball into my pocket and it jumped into the air to get out of the divot..... 😱
I have been leaving the break pad on the table when I play and it is HIGHLY entertaining.

Hope I don't break a window though!
Screenshot_20220725-141329.jpg

4 ball: into Eric's corner bucket.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
i had 2 balls on the spot the other day
went to shoot the front ball into my pocket and it jumped into the air to get out of the divot..... 😱
Time for new cloth. It might be possible to fix the divot but it's hard to get it flat.
 

Hits 'em Hard

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Just re-read it and I see no problem.

Lou Figueroa
Bob, really?

You are obviously not a 1pocket player. Of all the guys I've played over the years I can only think of *one guy* who would be such a nit as to not freeze the balls a shot or two later, ref or no ref.

Lou Figueroa
Are you sure? Because that explicitly is implying that you’re refreezing balls after turns have been made after the ball was spotted up and froze. What a nit.
 

lfigueroa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Are you sure? Because that explicitly is implying that you’re refreezing balls after turns have been made after the ball was spotted up and froze. What a nit.

Yes, I'm sure.

You're the guy using the word "refreezing." In the case we were discussing the balls were apparently never frozen to begin with and it is not clear that the ref even knew they were supposed to be frozen because JJ has to tell him they need to be frozen. I'm not arguing that balls that were frozen and become separate need to be refrozen, I'm saying that if they were never frozen to begin with and that that discrepancy is subsequently noted by the players, and they agree, they can then be frozen.

Here's what I said in my first post:

"Technically, foul.
Between two knowledgable players who know the balls should have been frozen and respect each other, not a foul."

And my next pertinent post:

"The player did not reverse diddly do-da.
JJ pointed out the separated balls informing the ref they were suppose to be frozen and the ref froze them.

Udder than that, do you have a cogent argument to make, nit?

Lou Figueroa
 
Last edited:

Hits 'em Hard

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Yes, I'm sure.

You're the guy using the word "refreezing." In the case we were discussing the balls were apparently never frozen to begin with and it is not clear that the ref even knew they were supposed to be frozen because JJ has to tell him they need to be frozen. I'm not arguing that balls that were frozen and become separate need to be refrozen, I'm saying that if they were never frozen to begin with and that that discrepancy is subsequently noted by the players, and they agree, they can then be frozen.

Here's what I said in my first post:

"Technically, foul.
Between two knowledgable players who know the balls should have been frozen and respect each other, not a foul."

And my next pertinent post:

"The player did not reverse diddly do-da.
JJ pointed out the separated balls informing the ref they were suppose to be frozen and the ref froze them.

Udder than that, do you have a cogent argument to make, nit?

Lou Figueroa
Obviously you have a small comprehension problem going on. It seems there is a level of reading you’re not willing to do. What you wrote, and what you implied are two different things. Read only what I quoted and ask yourself if that’s what you meant. Because it doesn’t match up with the rest of your argument.
 

lfigueroa

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Obviously you have a small comprehension problem going on. It seems there is a level of reading you’re not willing to do. What you wrote, and what you implied are two different things. Read only what I quoted and ask yourself if that’s what you meant. Because it doesn’t match up with the rest of your argument.

Yes, there's difference: what you think I implied exists only between your ears.

Lou Figueroa
stop listening
to the voices, lol
 
Top