Push Shot vs. Double Hit

[Cornerman]

This comes up once a year, so I'll try it again. Most of you responders who think you know what a push shot are incorrect, as far as what's been written as a definition for decades. If you're nodding to yourself saying, "I know what a push shot is," then you are probably one of the people who are wrong.

Mike Page is right. ConArtist (and many others), you're not right.

so you don't hit the cueball twice which is called a push shot

No, this is very wrong according to every written rulebook on the game. A push shot and a double-hit are two entirely different fouls.

A double hit is when you hit the cueball twice or more in one stroke. Pretty self-explanatory. The most common occurence is when someone shoot directly at the cueball and object ball when they are very close to each other but not frozen. If the cueball goes straight forward (at about the same speed as the object ball), it's most likely (99.9%+) a foul by double-hit.


A push shot is when one physically pushes the cueball with his cue tip. Also very self-explanatory. In old games like 14.1, a player might put the tip right on the cueball, and then push it along its merry way. This is an illegal push shot. Most of the time, they were throwing a frozen object ball.

Throwing a frozen ball with a legal stroke is perfectly legal; throwing a frozen ball with a push shot is illegal.

Many referees and professionals are completely clueless about these decades-old explicit definitions. I hope you all read carefully. Consult your BCA rulebook

Fred <~~~ until next year
__________________

 

[The Kiss]

All I know is I call 'em both fouls when I seem them....What more do you need to know...

 

[Colin Colenso]

This comes up once a year, so I'll try it again. Most of you responders who think you know what a push shot are incorrect, as far as what's been written as a definition for decades. If you're nodding to yourself saying, "I know what a push shot is," then you are probably one of the people who are wrong.

Mike Page is right. ConArtist (and many others), you're not right.




No, this is very wrong according to every written rulebook on the game. A push shot and a double-hit are two entirely different fouls.

A double hit is when you hit the cueball twice or more in one stroke. Pretty self-explanatory. The most common occurence is when someone shoot directly at the cueball and object ball when they are very close to each other but not frozen. If the cueball goes straight forward (at about the same speed as the object ball), it's most likely (99.9%+) a foul by double-hit.


A push shot is when one physically pushes the cueball with his cue tip. Also very self-explanatory. In old games like 14.1, a player might put the tip right on the cueball, and then push it along its merry way. This is an illegal push shot. Most of the time, they were throwing a frozen object ball.

Throwing a frozen ball with a legal stroke is perfectly legal; throwing a frozen ball with a push shot is illegal.

Many referees and professionals are completely clueless about these decades-old explicit definitions. I hope you all read carefully. Consult your BCA rulebook

Fred <~~~ until next year
__________________

In English 8-ball, it is permissable to hit through on the same line when CB and OB are almost touching. Certainly a double or multiple hit on the CB, but accepted in this game. Frankly I prefer this rule.

I'd like to see it added in all games, including the situation of touching CB and OB.

So long as the cue travels foward in a smooth movement linear movement, with one phase of purposeful accelleration. i.e. Not allowing someone to continue to push the CB along a path direction. Also, any double hit should not be visably or audibly noticeable.

In practice, this rule works quite well, with few gray areas, unlike the BCA ruling which I believe end up with legal shots being penalized and illegal shots not being penalized quite often.

Also, playing these push shots allows another set of skills and knowledge of ball interactions to come into the game.

One more point: It allows beginners who often push through such shots the comfort of not having to worry that they are breaking rules.

 

[Cornerman]

In English 8-ball, it is permissable to hit through on the same line when CB and OB are almost touching. Certainly a double or multiple hit on the CB, but accepted in this game. Frankly I prefer this rule.
.

I'm with you on this Colin. I figure if you can control the double-hit, more power to you. And, there'd be less debate.

Fred

 

[Cornerman]

All I know is I call 'em both fouls when I seem them....What more do you need to know...

You need to know the difference in order to tell whether a foul has been committed.

Fred

 

[zeeder]

You need to know the difference in order to tell whether a foul has been committed.

Fred

A good analogy would be that a push shot is similar to a lift in volleyball. Basically the tip stays in contact with the cueball for an extended period of time as opposed to hitting it two or more times.

 

[jsp]

A push shot is when one physically pushes the cueball with his cue tip...

...Throwing a frozen ball with a legal stroke is perfectly legal; throwing a frozen ball with a push shot is illegal.

The problem is how can you actually differentiate between a legal shot and a push shot, considering that all legal shots are technically "pushed" by the cue tip to a certain degree. After all, the impact between cue and CB is not exactly one instant in time, but rather the CB is pushed by the tip in the order of a millisecond or two. It's even more difficult to distinguish between the two cases when the CB and OB are frozen.

 

[Williebetmore]

Seems to be just another example of the extremely poor standardization and description of our "pool rules".

ALL shots are push shots to some degree, it just depends on how long the cue tip is in contact with the cue ball. How many milliseconds of tip contact are allowable?? Even a long push shot can be over in less than a second with a fast stroke. Is it the distance covered while in contact, or the time of contact that makes it a push shot - anyway, both are difficult to measure.

I think it has also been shown with high speed cameras that all shots where you aim the cueball into an object ball frozen to it are double hits; even if you elevate and don't follow through (which is usually permissible in the tournaments in which I have competed).

We need a National Pool Czar - I'm voting for Fred!!!!

 

[jsp]

In English 8-ball, it is permissable to hit through on the same line when CB and OB are almost touching. Certainly a double or multiple hit on the CB, but accepted in this game. Frankly I prefer this rule.

I'd like to see it added in all games, including the situation of touching CB and OB.

So long as the cue travels foward in a smooth movement linear movement, with one phase of purposeful accelleration. i.e. Not allowing someone to continue to push the CB along a path direction. Also, any double hit should not be visably or audibly noticeable.

In practice, this rule works quite well, with few gray areas, unlike the BCA ruling which I believe end up with legal shots being penalized and illegal shots not being penalized quite often.

Also, playing these push shots allows another set of skills and knowledge of ball interactions to come into the game.

One more point: It allows beginners who often push through such shots the comfort of not having to worry that they are breaking rules.

I disagree. I think allowing the player to freely double hit the CB will add much more gray area than the current rules. What decides exactly how much follow-through is permissible? If the OB and CB are half an inch apart, is it okay to follow-through in this case? What about two inches apart? What about a foot apart? Where do you draw the line?

 

[Tom In Cincy]

(much snipped)
Many referees and professionals are completely clueless about these decades-old explicit definitions. I hope you all read carefully. Consult your BCA rulebook

Fred, the BCA rulebook only introduced the "guidelines" for calling a 'double hit' or 'push shot' in the mid to late 90s. "Get the ref is the ball separation is a chalk's distance or less" CB traveling forward ½ the distance of the OB can be called a foul.

Your 'decades old' reference seems extreme.

And, IMO, you can 'push' and 'double hit' the cue ball in the same shot.
Remember, the defiinition of a 'push shot' is the tip contact remaining on the cue ball longer than normal (intentional or not) BTW, wouldn't a masse shot beconsidered a 'push shot'?

Tournament players usually bring this up in a players meeting. TD's and refs explain what would be called a foul and why.

Also, there are many players that know the difference between a push and a double hit. At least in the Mid west and out here on the Coast.

 

[Cornerman]

I think it has also been shown with high speed cameras that all shots where you aim the cueball into an object ball frozen to it are double hits; !!!

Exactly Opposite. The high speed video showed that a shot directly at a frozen pair is a single hit.

Fred

 

[Cornerman]

Your 'decades old' reference seems extreme.

Every rulebook in my desk 1977, 1985, etc.) have the clear definition of push shot and double hit. This would consitute "decades old."

And, IMO, you can 'push' and 'double hit' the cue ball in the same shot.

Of course you can, but they're still two separate and disctinct fouls.

Also, there are many players that know the difference between a push and a double hit. At least in the Mid west and out here on the Coast.

Are there more players that know the difference compared to those that don't know the difference? Wouldn't you agree that of the people that responded, the vast majority don't know the difference?

Fred

 

[Colin Colenso]

I disagree. I think allowing the player to freely double hit the CB will add much more gray area than the current rules. What decides exactly how much follow-through is permissible? If the OB and CB are half an inch apart, is it okay to follow-through in this case? What about two inches apart? What about a foot apart? Where do you draw the line?

I speak from having played under these rules and the implementation works well, rarely with controversy.

Yes, someties players push through on shots an inch apart. If they do so, they better hit it firm to avoid the visible or audible double hit. The benefit of doubt goes to the player. Though, it is rarely in the interest of the player to double hit, as it is very hard to control the cue ball.

When several inches apart, it is clearly a double hit visibly, so fouled.

It may not make sense from a physics perspective, but in real play it works well and is friendly to the player with imagination and skillful control. e.g. A shot I used to like to play was the push through with draw, such that the CB would go through the ball 12 inches and then stop in position for the next ball.

It takes practice to develop control of these shots, but they open a new area of interesting shots and CB control. To me it makes the game richer and also more fun for the beginner who just wants to hit that ball in front of them.

 

[Cornerman]

The problem is how can you actually differentiate between a legal shot and a push shot, considering that all legal shots are technically "pushed" by the cue tip to a certain degree. After all, the impact between cue and CB is not exactly one instant in time, but rather the CB is pushed by the tip in the order of a millisecond or two. It's even more difficult to distinguish between the two cases when the CB and OB are frozen.

A push shot is a shot where you push the cueball. That's pretty specific. I think we all know the difference between, say, pushing a chair and hitting a chair.

But, physics speaking, for a push, both the objects in question have to leave the initial collision in contact and at the same velocity for a time longer than simple compression dynamics. That is, there is an additional pushing force that affects the contact during contact, whereas in a non-push, no additional force affects the contact.

In a collision that is not a push, the cue tip has a non-zero velocity before the contact. At contact, the cue tip is rapidly decelerating, and the object ball is rapidly accelerating. That collison can be express in a straight-forward conservation of energy and momentum. I don't think a push can be expressed in those terms, but instead a force*distance term.

I'd like to defer to better physics authorities to provide a more concise definition.

The volleyball analogy is a good one.

Fred

 

[Tom In Cincy]

Every rulebook in my desk 1977, 1985, etc.) have the clear definition of push shot and double hit. This would consitute "decades old."


Of course you can, but they're still two separate and disctinct fouls.

Tom In Cincy replies: Are you were refering to the BCA guide line rule introduced in the mid 90s? Didn't that guideline get a title "judging push shots"?



Are there more players that know the difference compared to those that don't know the difference? Wouldn't you agree that of the people that responded, the vast majority don't know the difference?

Tom In Cincy replies: Yes, I agree. Too bad the BCA is the only reference you can quote on this forum. The APA, VNEA, ACS, TAP, UPA, WPA all have similar difinitions for push and double hits, and some of them don't care about close hit results. Too much controversy. Too difficult to explain. And a lot of league players do not care what the BCA/World Standard rules are.

Fred

IMO it would be more explicit to quote all the rules, not just the BCA.
I've got two rule books. The BCA and Texas Express. One for rule buffs and one for players.

 

[Cornerman]

Are you were refering to the BCA guide line rule introduced in the mid 90s? Didn't that guideline get a title "judging push shots"?

I think you've missed the point of the thread, Tom. The thread is simply pointing out the distinct difference between the definitions of a push shot vs. the definition of a double-hit.

Too bad the BCA is the only reference you can quote on this forum.

Again, the thread was specifically started to point out the difference between a push shot and double-hit, as most of the posters in the other thread clearly do not know the correct definition. The BCA rulebook defined these terms long before the APA, VNEA, or other leagues were in existence. If another organization defined these first, I'd quote them.

The definitions are clear and self-explanatory. Judging them is a whole different story.

Fred

 

[The Kiss]

You need to know the difference in order to tell whether a foul has been committed.

Fred

Thats like saying when a cue ball jumps off the table...Do you really need to go into specifics to know its a foul??? Any seasoned player knows its a foul...Some rookie or just a moron might need it explained....Thats why if we are playing for cash we tell the guy to jack up..then he knows a foul is coming if he does'nt...A double hit is generally given away by the sound, or if the guy does'nt jack up in tight quarters...A push is generally obvious by the follow thru in a the same tight quarters

 

[Cornerman]

Some rookie or just a moron might need it explained....

A double hit is generally given away by the sound, or if the guy does'nt jack up in tight quarters

Jacking up doesn't guarantee anything. Is it possible that you also don't understand the definitions?

Fred

 

[poolboy17]

The problem is how can you actually differentiate between a legal shot and a push shot, considering that all legal shots are technically "pushed" by the cue tip to a certain degree. After all, the impact between cue and CB is not exactly one instant in time, but rather the CB is pushed by the tip in the order of a millisecond or two. It's even more difficult to distinguish between the two cases when the CB and OB are frozen.

A push shot is when the tip maintains contact with the cueball for a longer duration than it would on a normal forward stroke. On frozen balls you may shoot through with a normal forward stroke.

Most of the time when someone illegally pushes the cueball on frozen balls...you get what refs sometimes refer to as "the slide". IMHO, it's not the most difficult call to get right.

I also agree...hittting at a 45 degree or greater angle (when not frozen) doesn't guarantee that you won't double hit the ball. If you were to jack up on frozen balls...it may actually cause you to foul.

 

[jsp]

I speak from having played under these rules and the implementation works well, rarely with controversy.

Yes, someties players push through on shots an inch apart. If they do so, they better hit it firm to avoid the visible or audible double hit. The benefit of doubt goes to the player. Though, it is rarely in the interest of the player to double hit, as it is very hard to control the cue ball.

When several inches apart, it is clearly a double hit visibly, so fouled.

From my understanding, it seems like your rules still do NOT allow for double hits, as long as they're not totally obvious, am I correct? So as long as a visible or audible double hit is not noticeable, the shot would be legal because there is no evidence that says a double hit took place.

However, what greater evidence would you need if the CB travels way beyond the impact point between CB and OB? Isn't this clear proof that a double hit took place? Therefore, it seems, from your rules, that double hits ARE allowed. Therefore, I can freely stroke through a CB and OB two inches apart, since there is nothing saying that I cannot do so?

Do you see what I mean? It seems like a lot more room for gray area.