Not that simple. The rule changes as often as the weather and is subject to local by laws. In my area, the rule has been that you can jump with your break cue but you can't break it down to do so. However, that may change next week.
Question about APA rule and also a funny rule you might not know of.
- Thread starter spindoctor9
- Start date
Not that simple. The rule changes as often as the weather and is subject to local by laws. In my area, the rule has been that you can jump with your break cue but you can't break it down to do so. However, that may change next week.
Actually, I think you're the one who should reread the rule book regarding jump shots, KMRUNOUT. The current manual (2012/2013 & 2013/2014) actually says "... a regular playing cue", not "... your regular playing cue". It's a small change, but the distinction is very important. It means that you CAN switch to just about any other cue if you want to shoot that jump shot, just not a jump cue. It also means that YOU as a player do not get to decide what a regular playing cue is. It's specifically worded that way (I should know, I helped word it) so people who like to take advantage of the way rules are written can't shoot the whole match with a jump cue just to claim it's legal for jump shots, should one happen to come up.
No, you don't have to. The penalty for breaking that rule is just a reminder not to do it next time. Not every rule has a severe penalty for those who break it. If you do it intentionally you are subject to a sportsmanship penalty.
Did you advice to warn opponent if he/she try to pocket higher numer ball in 9 ball? If i didn't play continues as normal ?
Actually, I would advise an opponent if he/she is about to shoot at the wrong ball. But if I don't, the penalty for breaking that rule applies, just like the other rule. Except the penalty for shooting the wrong ball is ball-in-hand.
Last edited:
Not that simple. The rule changes as often as the weather and is subject to local by laws. In my area, the rule has been that you can jump with your break cue but you can't break it down to do so. However, that may change next week.
It is that simple. The only thing that changed is you are now allowed to change to another playing (not jump/break cue) cue during your match. Let me spell this out for you:
APA Legal Jump:
Shot was a full length playing cue
APA Illegal Jump:
Scooping the ball
Shooting with a jump/break cue
Seriously this isn't rocket science.
call a foul before the foul?
call a foul before the foul?
Is that like buying a fake lottery ticket?
You must call in your winning ticket in before you scratch it off?
You just can't make this stuff up OR CAN YOU?
call a foul before the foul?
Is that like buying a fake lottery ticket?
You must call in your winning ticket in before you scratch it off?
You just can't make this stuff up OR CAN YOU?
Banks
Banned
It's a pretty simple rule, about the same as the frozen-ball thing. People screw up once in a while, so unless you're paying attention(hint: you're playing a game, pay attention), sometimes people forget and it isn't noticed. If you looked at a railed ball, but didn't call it frozen, then I went ahead and took the tap safety thinking that it wasn't frozen, you can't go running back and scream ball-in-hand. As APA Operator said, there's a good reason that rules are written the way that they are.
The last question is it's not a foul is what I was informed. I had same situation: scratched on break and went to sit down took a drink of beer and I look up and guy is shooting at this very moment. I ask him where he shot from and he pointed to spot outside kitchen. I said it's BIH in kitchen, I called a foul and took ball in hand. I play league on another night with an APA LO and he said it's not ball in hand because I didn't stop him.
Now when I scratch on break I say "ball in hand in kitchen"
Now when I scratch on break I say "ball in hand in kitchen"
The ball behind the head string thing is not a foul. I'll always wait until the opposing player looks like the shot is about to come from outside the kitchen before I say anything just not to create any pissy feelings, and when an object ball appears to be frozen to the rail someone in the match must declare the ball frozen if it is, and there must be an agreement between the players or a third party must be consulted. Of course, in different areas of the country local rules must be applied, but ONLY AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. One of my favorites is watching matches at the NTC and watching someone call a foul based on a local rule that is contrary to the HLT rules or the Team Manual and the argument that ensues as they defend their position.
Any APA player advancing to the NTC: Make it your responsibility to be familiar with the Rules in the book and the guidelines for the NTC. If you have a question email the APA from their web site for a clarification and insert that email into your Team Manual for future reference. Know the rules - it could save your life, .....lest you may explode right there in the main ballroom, and no one wants to see that
Any APA player advancing to the NTC: Make it your responsibility to be familiar with the Rules in the book and the guidelines for the NTC. If you have a question email the APA from their web site for a clarification and insert that email into your Team Manual for future reference. Know the rules - it could save your life, .....lest you may explode right there in the main ballroom, and no one wants to see that
I'll do you one better.... A friend that plays APA had this come up against his team last week during tri cups. The opposing player was banking the 8 ball straight back to the corner pocket they were standing at. They patched the pocket and in the course of shooting the player knocked the patch/coaster off of the rail to where it was leaning at an angle on the rail with the edge resting on the bed of the table. The 8 ball ramped off the patch and went in the pocket.
The local ref ruled it was a legal shot, the shooter won the game. St. Louis ruled the same. The shooter knocks a foreign object onto the playing surface, that later enables a non-makeable ball to go in, and its ruled as a legal shot???
The local ref ruled it was a legal shot, the shooter won the game. St. Louis ruled the same. The shooter knocks a foreign object onto the playing surface, that later enables a non-makeable ball to go in, and its ruled as a legal shot???
The rule allows for the marker to fall off the table but makes no mention of it's ability to disturb the path of the cue ball or the object ball. I think that might be covered in rules about accidentally making contact with object balls while addressing the cue ball or contacting balls before you shoot, that sort of thing. The ruling by St. Louis is a disturbing one, you tell me the difference: I'm the shooter in your example, I shoot my bank and I see it's not going to make it so I reach out and tap the 8 toward the pocket and at falls, I win, right? I think there is something in the rules now about if the 8 ball contacts the marker when it enters the pocket it's OK, but I interpret that to mean so my 8 is going in and the marker is hanging over the pocket a little and it makes contact, but changing the path of the object ball, that seem a bit far fetched. Check the other rules in the book
But in thinking about it a little more, what else can you do? You really can't spot the 8, can you reset the shot and let him do it again? if it was an accident has a foul been committed? Suppose an angry player at the next table threw a piece of chalk and it hits the 8 and that happens, what then? Black and white of the rule language is I guess it's a foul, I guess? Interesting...
Banks
Banned
Hmm.. I could've sworn that there was a rule regarding a pocket marker not interfering with balls in play or something. Maybe they removed it for whatever reason, or maybe I had seen it in a bylaw.. not sure. That is pretty stupid, though, to interfer with a ball in play for a win.
While a rule does state, "f. A game is forfeited if you alter the course of the 8-ball or the cue ball in a game losing situation", I wonder how the wording is interpreted.
While I enjoy playing, the dumbest thing I can think of is the modified-double-elim stuff. Next to that would have to be allowing a pocket marker to help in making the 8.
There used to be something in the book about the pocket marker not interfering... but in the most recent version I had looked for that rule and it was not there. I agree about the rule (f?, was it?), by the way that's another little known rule, your opponent makes the 8 and doesn't let the cue ball stop before he picks it up - loss of game.
I'd be interested to know why St. Louis ruled the way they did, that this was a legal shot, it would seem to me that if your at the table and it's during your shot, you would be responsible for any action on the table. But that's a tough call. It's happened where during regular weekly play someone a little "over stimulated" approached the table and thought they'd be clever and change up some things on the table. As it was a friendly game and only weekly play we replayed the game, it was only a few shots old. But in a Tri cup, or a cities or a National event, I can't imagine what the ruling might be, a little more is at stake. To me the rules have always covered something like this (altering the path, and all), but in reviewing this ruling that came from St. Louis, I don't know. It doesn't seem quite right.
I'd be interested to know why St. Louis ruled the way they did, that this was a legal shot, it would seem to me that if your at the table and it's during your shot, you would be responsible for any action on the table. But that's a tough call. It's happened where during regular weekly play someone a little "over stimulated" approached the table and thought they'd be clever and change up some things on the table. As it was a friendly game and only weekly play we replayed the game, it was only a few shots old. But in a Tri cup, or a cities or a National event, I can't imagine what the ruling might be, a little more is at stake. To me the rules have always covered something like this (altering the path, and all), but in reviewing this ruling that came from St. Louis, I don't know. It doesn't seem quite right.
APA Operator,
It would be impossible for me to re-read the very newest version of the rule book, as I have not yet read it once. I have one in my hand now, and consulted the relevant sections. As it turns out, the APA has followed its typical pattern of not thinking *all the way* through what they say and do. I sure hope you guys didn't spend too much time on section 33 of the general rules. If you assisted in the "rewording", then perhaps next book, you could offer the most help by recommending they get some *outside* help in writing this stuff.
The changes in the current version of the book do essentially nothing. Yes, section 33 now says "masse and jump shots...must be attempted using a regular shooting cue. The only confusion this might address is that now a player need not be the *owner* of the cue they use. If you then consult the glossary to get the definition of a "regular shooting cue", you will see that wording has changed from "a cue that the player shoots the majority of his or her shots with" to "a cue designed to shoot the majority of shots in a game of pool".
Here is where that definition comes up short: Phenolic tips are allowed in the APA. Hence I could put a phenolic tip on my playing cue and shoot every single shot with it if I so chose. Likewise, pro player Mike Dechaine shoots all of his shots with a 314-2 shaft on a BK2 break cue butt. There is absolutely nothing barring this in the APA. Hence, there is nothing barring me from shooting 100% of my shots with my BK2 break cue, phenolic tip and all.
I can't understand why the APA overlooked the obvious. Simply make a rule that states that cues less than a certain length may not be used for jumping. Likewise, they could simply state that a player must designate a particular cue as their regular playing cue, and if they wish they may designate a different cue for breaking. You are not allowed to jump with your designated break cue.
There are many things they *could* have done, but for some odd reason they didn't. As it stands now, the rules are still ambiguous enough to allow the use of a jump cue for every single shot. If your goal was to word the rule in such a way to prevent that, you didn't. I'm sorry if this bothers you. Let me know if you want my help for the next revision.
KMRUNOUT
If you want it "spelled out", read the rule book. They spell it out there. The rules are poorly written and ambiguous. Rocket Science isn't rocket science for people who are not rocket scientists. Think on that
KMRUNOUT
If you want it "spelled out", read the rule book. They spell it out there. The rules are poorly written and ambiguous. Rocket Science isn't rocket science for people who are not rocket scientists. Think on that
KMRUNOUT
Sorry if I came across offensive. Even if the APA wording isn't very good the bottom line is you cannot jump with a break/jump cue.
Honestly you guys are splitting hairs. You can jump in APA but you need to use a regular cue. Not a break cue, not a jump cue. Just a regular playing cue (I think you know what this is). Stop making this so hard to understand.
I can just see it now. Some chap is going to play 51% of his shots using his break cue just so he can do an occasional jump shot with a break cue. When somebody calls him out it will turn into a big argument and then the captain is going to fetch the manual. 30 minutes later nobody is going to be happy with the outcome and everybody will have wasted time over something so simple and stupid.
\
Sharkester,
You didn't come across as offensive. I agree with you that the concept is simple. However, writing rules that clearly express that simple concept without any room for ambiguity is apparently not so simple. The APA people have been unsuccessful so far. The whole point is that the way the rules are written, you CAN use a break cue for jump shots. I realize this is likely not the intention. Nonetheless, the way to avoid arguments about the rules is to spell out the rules very clearly, not rely on what people *want* the rules to be, or the *spirit* of the rules. Those two things are highly variable from person to person. I have broke and ran 9 ball racks with my BK2 break cue with phenolic tip. Actually, I'm quite amazed it works as well as it does for draw and english.
The issue isn't about this being "so hard to understand". This is a conversation about the *rules*. The rules are in writing. The words mean what they mean. It is slightly offensive perhaps to say we are "just splitting hairs". That pretty much means that you are condemning me or us for being more sensitive to the details than you. It is EXACTLY the same thing as when an APA 4 racks the balls and there are gaps all over the place, and when you ask for a re-rack, you are "splitting hairs". The bottom line is the balls are either frozen or they are not. There are no hairs to split. I have learned a lot about the rack so that most of the time I am happy to accept a very flawed rack. You follow where I'm coming from? Some people simply don't care as much about details as others. However, when you are specifically engaged in a conversation about those exact details, I suppose they matter somewhat more, no?
KMRUNOUT
I do take it as splitting hairs when you question the definition "a cue designed to shoot the majority of shots in a game of pool". Obviously they are not talking about a jump/break cue which is your contention if I am not mistaken.
I'm afraid I'm not following your logic here. Regardless of whether a pro or anyone else shoots all of their shots with it, the BK2 break cue was not designed for shooting the majority of shots in a game of pool. Hence, it is not a regular playing cue, and you may not shoot a jump shot with it. But hey, if you want to shoot all of your OTHER shots with it, knock yourself out. And if you really want to shoot all of your shots with a phenolic tip on a regular cue just in case one of them is a jump shot, be my guest.
What was that term you used? Short-sighted? I can see the ad now - "Introducing the Yankee Doodle Jump Cue. Stick a feather in the butt and call it legal!"
As for designating a regular playing cue, is there going to be another rule prohibiting me from designating my Yankee Doodle Jump Cue as my regular playing cue? What does that rule look like?
That was never the goal. I stated APA's reasoning in a previous response, and that will have to suffice. I believe the current rules as written achieve the actual goals. As for the next revision, if you want to help, PM me with your suggestions. But you'll have to do better than "cues less than a certain length".
What he is saying here is that the butt is designed for a break cue, but the shaft he is using is not designed for the sole purpose to break and/or jump. So does the fact that its a BK2 butt qualify it as a break cue even though the shaft is not designed for breaking?