Push shot foul?

GideonF said:
I just set two shots up - one with a tiny gap and one frozen - and I couldn’t see a big difference in the ball reaction. What should I be looking for?
Click to expand...
I don't think you can tell whether they were frozen or not after the hit. I was just saying that if the balls are not frozen as checked beforehand, and the cue ball flies immediately down the table close to the object ball, it was a double hit, and that you shouldn't be looking for chalk spots.
 
westcoast said:
I know it is a rule in American pool, but what is the rationale for push shots to be legal when balls are frozen?
Click to expand...
Suppose the cue ball is frozen to the six ball which is next in a game of nine ball. What kind of shot should be allowed? Like snooker, where you can shoot away from the ball and get credit for having hit it? You get ball in hand anywhere? The ball is removed and you shoot at the next one? You have to use at least a 45-degree elevation? Grady's rule was that you had to shoot the shot "with character". Really.

If you are going to remove the "OK to shoot at a frozen ball" rule, you have to put something else in. What would you like to see?

(It's not a push shot by the definition in the rules. A push shot is something else that requires a very special stroke.)
 
MattPoland said:
I like sharing this 22 second clip to illustrate why it’s not a push.
youtube.com

✂️ Frozen Shot Rules and Footage

21 seconds · Clipped by Matt Poland · Original video "FROZEN CUE BALL SHOTS … Everything You Need to Know" by DrDaveBilliards
youtube.com youtube.com
Click to expand...

This is a great clip of why it’s not a double hit but it doesn’t show the difference between a legal shot into a frozen ball and an illegal push shot. Lots of people apparently (including Karl Boyes it seems) think it’s a push. Do you know of a clip showing the actual illegal push technique?
 
Bob Jewett said:
That often gives the wrong answer -- in both directions.
Click to expand...
I’d like to hear more. But the post said that there wasn’t a noticeable difference in cueball movement on the frozen ball vs a small gap. I agree, but one is a foul and one not. I also agree that if you are saying the better way to call it is cueball movement. But, isn’t it also true that the sound with the small gap is often way different than the frozen balls? That is with just shooting through in both situations.
 
westcoast said:
I know it is a rule in American pool, but what is the rationale for push shots to be legal when balls are frozen?
Click to expand...
*When Frozen Only* The rationale is it's not actually a "push" or a "double hit". There is only one contact, and the contact is normal like hitting a regular shot. This has been proven with high speed camera footage.
 
Okay, I have the definitive answer here! I uploaded the video to ChatGPT and asked it whether this was a legal hit. ChatGPT said "Rosebud," so there you have the correct answer.
 
GideonF said:
This is a great clip of why it’s not a double hit but it doesn’t show the difference between a legal shot into a frozen ball and an illegal push shot. Lots of people apparently (including Karl Boyes it seems) think it’s a push. Do you know of a clip showing the actual illegal push technique?
Click to expand...
You’re right it doesn’t show the illegal technique. At that point I just quote the rules:
3.8 PUSH SHOT
It is a foul to prolong tip-to-cue-ball contact beyond that seen in normal shots.
Click to expand...
And then point out in the video you see the tip, cueball and object ball all immediately separate. The tip-to-cue-ball contact time is exactly in line with the timing seen in normal shots. And that a real “push” is basically resting the tip on the ball then shoving.
 
GideonF said:
I just set two shots up - one with a tiny gap and one frozen - and I couldn’t see a big difference in the ball reaction. What should I be looking for?
Click to expand...
If there's a gap on the OP shot, CB should not go the same speed as the object ball.
Even if the gap was lets say 1/8 of an inch and you didn't know it, the ball actions after contact would be very similar to a slight gap.
So calling the shot not frozen would tell the shooter to not do what Pongers attempted.
 
GideonF said:
I just set two shots up - one with a tiny gap and one frozen - and I couldn’t see a big difference in the ball reaction. What should I be looking for?
Click to expand...

Nothing. If the balls are frozen it's good. If they're not, it's a foul.

It's that simple.
 
Island Drive said:
If there's a gap on the OP shot, CB should not go the same speed as the object ball.
Even if the gap was lets say 1/8 of an inch and you didn't know it, the ball actions after contact would be very similar to a slight gap.
So calling the shot not frozen would tell the shooter to not do what Pongers attempted.
Click to expand...

I understand why it’s a foul if there is a gap and why it’s legal if no gap. I had thought Bob J was suggesting that you could tell from the ball reaction if they were frozen and couldn’t see it so I asked what to look for. Bob responded that I misunderstood and there is nothing to look for.
 
iusedtoberich said:
*When Frozen Only* The rationale is it's not actually a "push" or a "double hit". There is only one contact, and the contact is normal like hitting a regular shot. This has been proven with high speed camera footage.
Click to expand...
that makes sense. However, in this particular instance, it sure looked like he pushed through and therefore double hit
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top