Opinions on "forced win" rule.

Mr. Bond

Orbis Non Sufficit
Gold Member
Silver Member
Player vs player in a match..and their score is tied, hill hill.

Player A breaks a rule that, by the book, automatically gives him a loss.

Player B, by the book, gets the win and the match

BUT player B doesnt want to win by a technicality and insists on playing the final game anyway.

Question: should a player have the option of insisting that a final game be played, or should a player be "forced" to take the win.
 

thepavlos

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
If player B insists and Player A doen't mind I don't see why not since A is getting a second chance.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Player vs player in a match..and their score is tied, hill hill.

Player A breaks a rule that, by the book, automatically gives him a loss.

Player B, by the book, gets the win and the match

BUT player B doesnt want to win by a technicality and insists on playing the final game anyway.

Question: should a player have the option of insisting that a final game be played, or should a player be "forced" to take the win.

If this is a tournament and there is a ref or a tournament director, he is bound by duty to enforce the rules. Presumably the players have agreed to abide by the rules. That means they are supposed to follow them, too.

If it is a private game or there is no official, the players decide themselves what to do. If there is a calcutta, Heaven help the "polite" guy.
 

Jerry R

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I greatly admire the guy who insisted they play it out, and have done similar things myself when a opponent is late to a match, but at this level of play the rules should be strictly enforced by the tournament director.

While in a sense it would have backfired in this scenario, the purpose of that rule is to make sure the spectators get to see the last ball drop.

I know I was annoyed at how many games Earl conceded to Darren in that 4 pocket match and wish they would have forced them to play out each game.
 
Last edited:

BRussell

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
If it's a refereed match, like Turning Stone was, Billy, I mean the player who committed the foul, should lose.
 

hang-the-9

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Player vs player in a match..and their score is tied, hill hill.

Player A breaks a rule that, by the book, automatically gives him a loss.

Player B, by the book, gets the win and the match

BUT player B doesnt want to win by a technicality and insists on playing the final game anyway.

Question: should a player have the option of insisting that a final game be played, or should a player be "forced" to take the win.

Hm.. sounds familiar LOL Turning Stone maybe... maybe...

Maybe not exactly the same thing, but I have seen a video of snooker sportsmanship where the player would overrule the ref ruling and refuse to take the foul or the other player would not accept a foul that was called on the opponent.
 

jimmyco

NRA4Life
Gold Member
Silver Member
As player B might find the victory bittersweet, would player A be pleased by winning on a second chance?
 

Cracktherack

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Spectators should not have any say in the matter. The same as yelling out "Shoot the 2, not the 3." If a player is about to shoot the wrong ball. "Foul, I saw it from way up here." "Hey, you forgot to mark up your point."
If you're watching the game as an observer, keep your mouth shut and your opinion of a broken rule doesn't matter anyway.

If you claim you're just trying to clean up the image of pool, forget about it. That has been going on for 60 years with no progress.
 

book collector

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Spectators should not have any say in the matter. The same as yelling out "Shoot the 2, not the 3." If a player is about to shoot the wrong ball. "Foul, I saw it from way up here." "Hey, you forgot to mark up your point."
If you're watching the game as an observer, keep your mouth shut and your opinion of a broken rule doesn't matter anyway.

If you claim you're just trying to clean up the image of pool, forget about it. That has been going on for 60 years with no progress.

I was playing in a tournament and the young guy I was playing was doing all he could to shark me.
Walking around in front of me while I am shooting yakking to friends about the shot I am getting ready to hit etc. etc.
I finally get to the hill and he has about 3 games and knows it's over .
While I am shooting he leaves the table to play the juke box , when he gets back I have run out.
Then one of his friends says , he fouled on the 4 ball.
Which I had not. wasn't even close.
Now the young guy starts argueing with me that it's his game lol.
There is a never ending supply of idiots and creeps swimming in the billiards pool.
 

book collector

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Hm.. sounds familiar LOL Turning Stone maybe... maybe...

Maybe not exactly the same thing, but I have seen a video of snooker sportsmanship where the player would overrule the ref ruling and refuse to take the foul or the other player would not accept a foul that was called on the opponent.

If I was the ref in that situation, I would give them both a loss.
 

Mr. Bond

Orbis Non Sufficit
Gold Member
Silver Member
Spectators should not have any say in the matter. The same as yelling out "Shoot the 2, not the 3." If a player is about to shoot the wrong ball. "Foul, I saw it from way up here." "Hey, you forgot to mark up your point."
If you're watching the game as an observer, keep your mouth shut and your opinion of a broken rule doesn't matter anyway.

If you claim you're just trying to clean up the image of pool, forget about it. That has been going on for 60 years with no progress.

Spectators are a non issue.

Question is whether or not a player should be forced to take a win if he doesn't want it, or should the rules trump all regardless .

Just an opinion question. I have no agenda.
 

RiverCity

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
If this is a tournament and there is a ref or a tournament director, he is bound by duty to enforce the rules. Presumably the players have agreed to abide by the rules. That means they are supposed to follow them, too.

If it is a private game or there is no official, the players decide themselves what to do. If there is a calcutta, Heaven help the "polite" guy.

Tap tap tap
 

gregcantrall

Center Ball
Silver Member
Spectators are a non issue.

Question is whether or not a player should be forced to take a win if he doesn't want it, or should the rules trump all regardless .

Just an opinion question. I have no agenda.

I could be mistaken but it seems to me that I remember BCAPL having a rule about players agreeing not to follow the rules.

Personally I have done the declining and played it out when the rule was broken to the letter but not to the spirit. There used to be a rule against laying the cue on the table (to help with aiming) so technically a player laying his cue on the table to preserve the layout while going to the restroom could be called for a foul. There are others as well.
 

td873

C is for Cookie
Gold Member
Silver Member
If it's a refereed match, like Turning Stone was, Billy, I mean the player who committed the foul, should lose.

Arguably, Billy committed a deliberate foul (moving a stationary object ball), which probably results in a different penalty than loss of game + 1 game.

I can see how some might say he was conceding the game - but what I saw was billy showing a little frustration and whacking the 9-ball across table with his stick. That's only a ball in hand foul.

Plus, who wants to be the guy who wins because you called a special kind of foul?

And, spectators want to see players play. Not officials calling games.

As mentioned earlier, if both players agree - where's the harm?

-td
 

StraightPoolIU

Brent
Silver Member
In a tournament situation it shouldn't matter what the opponent does or doesn't want to happen. The match should run according to the agreed upon rules of the event.
 

maha

from way back when
Silver Member
if players can continue a game that is officailly over then they can make the set another ten games or so right. if they can add a game then why not ten games.

and what about the guy to play next he doesnt get the winner of the set as the other guy gets a second chance and may have a different opponent than he should.

what if it was a top player that lost and then tells the weaker player winner, .let me play on as i have a better chance of collecting then you so we can go halves then.
 

ChrisinNC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Player vs player in a match..and their score is tied, hill hill.

Player A breaks a rule that, by the book, automatically gives him a loss.

Player B, by the book, gets the win and the match

BUT player B doesnt want to win by a technicality and insists on playing the final game anyway.

Question: should a player have the option of insisting that a final game be played, or should a player be "forced" to take the win.
It sets a bad precedent to undermine the rules and/or the ruling the TD has made in the match, under any circumstances, if it is a tournament match at any level. If it is a private match between two players, they may choose to settle it as they wish.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
... As mentioned earlier, if both players agree - where's the harm? ...-td
Are they ever going to learn to behave like professionals? Maybe they will get there a little faster if they learn, understand, and play by the rules.
 

hang-the-9

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Arguably, Billy committed a deliberate foul (moving a stationary object ball), which probably results in a different penalty than loss of game + 1 game.

I can see how some might say he was conceding the game - but what I saw was billy showing a little frustration and whacking the 9-ball across table with his stick. That's only a ball in hand foul.

Plus, who wants to be the guy who wins because you called a special kind of foul?

And, spectators want to see players play. Not officials calling games.

As mentioned earlier, if both players agree - where's the harm?

-td

If you hit the 9 ball like that, it's clearly a concession. Are you saying that some fouls are OK to call but not others? I have seen literal fights break out over people following rules, I don't think we should get into "this rule is OK to break, this one is not".

It's pretty simple to me, if you don't want to lose due to a rule, obey the rule.
 
Top