Question about the 3 Fouls Rule

Vinnie

Vinnie

pool is cool.
Silver Member
To start, here is the WPA Rule concerning 3 consecutive fouls...

6.14 Three Consecutive Fouls
If a player fouls three times without making an intervening legal shot, it is a serious foul. In games scored by the rack, such as nine ball, the fouls must be in a single rack. Some games such as eight ball do not include this rule.
The referee must warn a shooter who is on two fouls when he comes to the table that he is on two fouls. Otherwise a possible third foul will be considered to be only the second.

Now, my question...

For the 3-foul rule to be valid, if player A fouls, does it matter whether or not player B pockets any balls before player A makes a third consecutive foul?

The reason I ask is because last night a friend of mine told me that when he played the big Reno tournaments in the past, if player A fouls, the standing rule was that the 3-foul rule was not valid if player B pockets any ball after player A's 1st or 2nd fouls. In other words, if player A fouls, then player B MUST take ball-in-hand and play a safe, then if player A fouls again, then player B MUST take ball-in-hand and play another safe.
I told him that I did not think that this was correct. Has anyone ever played or heard of this strange rule?
 
There are many far more qualified people here to answer more in detail, and expound on different governing body details, but the short answer is:

I call Hogwash! 3 fouls in a row is 3 fouls in a row - game over.
 
if player A committs 3 consecutive fouls in his attempts at the table...then that is loss of game. it doesnt matter what player B does (i.e. pockets balls). but, player B does have to inform him that he is on 2 fouls.
 
Vinnie said:
To start, here is the WPA Rule concerning 3 consecutive fouls...

6.14 Three Consecutive Fouls
If a player fouls three times without making an intervening legal shot, it is a serious foul. In games scored by the rack, such as nine ball, the fouls must be in a single rack. Some games such as eight ball do not include this rule.
The referee must warn a shooter who is on two fouls when he comes to the table that he is on two fouls. Otherwise a possible third foul will be considered to be only the second.

Now, my question...

For the 3-foul rule to be valid, if player A fouls, does it matter whether or not player B pockets any balls before player A makes a third consecutive foul?

The reason I ask is because last night a friend of mine told me that when he played the big Reno tournaments in the past, if player A fouls, the standing rule was that the 3-foul rule was not valid if player B pockets any ball after player A's 1st or 2nd fouls. In other words, if player A fouls, then player B MUST take ball-in-hand and play a safe, then if player A fouls again, then player B MUST take ball-in-hand and play another safe.
I told him that I did not think that this was correct. Has anyone ever played or heard of this strange rule?
Click to expand...

Three consecutive fouls by any player would result in loss of game, regaurdless of what your opponet does. You could actually get up and scratch on three consecutive shots and loose. Your opponet dosen't have to play safe at all.
 
Vinnie said:
To start, here is the WPA Rule concerning 3 consecutive fouls...

6.14 Three Consecutive Fouls
If a player fouls three times without making an intervening legal shot, it is a serious foul. In games scored by the rack, such as nine ball, the fouls must be in a single rack. Some games such as eight ball do not include this rule.
The referee must warn a shooter who is on two fouls when he comes to the table that he is on two fouls. Otherwise a possible third foul will be considered to be only the second.

Now, my question...

For the 3-foul rule to be valid, if player A fouls, does it matter whether or not player B pockets any balls before player A makes a third consecutive foul?

The reason I ask is because last night a friend of mine told me that when he played the big Reno tournaments in the past, if player A fouls, the standing rule was that the 3-foul rule was not valid if player B pockets any ball after player A's 1st or 2nd fouls. In other words, if player A fouls, then player B MUST take ball-in-hand and play a safe, then if player A fouls again, then player B MUST take ball-in-hand and play another safe.
I told him that I did not think that this was correct. Has anyone ever played or heard of this strange rule?
Click to expand...


Ask Bob Jewett. He would know for sure. :thumbup:
 
I'm only sure on the rule for 14.1, not VNEA or whatever.

It doesn't matter what your opponent does, if you foul in 3 consecutive tries you are penalized. The only exception for that in 14.1 would be if you scratched and your opponent didn't shoot the cue out of the kitchen.
 
OneArmed,
Why would that be an exception?



OneArmed said:
I'm only sure on the rule for 14.1, not VNEA or whatever.

It doesn't matter what your opponent does, if you foul in 3 consecutive tries you are penalized. The only exception for that in 14.1 would be if you scratched and your opponent didn't shoot the cue out of the kitchen.
Click to expand...
 
Bcapl

I can only speak for the BCAPL rules, but they are pretty straight up:

3.6 Three Successive Fouls
If you commit three successive fouls in one game you lose the game. After your second successive foul your opponent or a referee must warn you that you are on two fouls and you must acknowledge the warning. If the warning is not issued and you foul a third successive time:
a. it is not considered your third successive foul;
9-BALL
b. you do not lose the game;
c. your foul count remains at two.
 
ne14tennis said:
After your second successive foul your opponent or a referee must warn you that you are on two fouls and you must acknowledge the warning.
Click to expand...

Just playing devil's advocate here, but if my opponent warns me I'm on two, but I don't acknowledge it, does that nullify the warning?

Steve
 
pooltchr said:
Just playing devil's advocate here, but if my opponent warns me I'm on two, but I don't acknowledge it, does that nullify the warning?

Steve
Click to expand...

Yes. The Supreme Pool Court has decided that hiding your head in the sand will keep you safe
 
If your warn your opponent and he/she doesn't acknowledge it, I would call tell the opponent that I want the ref/TD to watch the hit. Play is suspended until the ref/TD arrives. Then tell the ref/TD that the player is on TWO. That will cover the situation.

If the opponent shoots before the ref/TD arrives, it is a foul and also unsportsmanlike conduct.


pooltchr said:
Just playing devil's advocate here, but if my opponent warns me I'm on two, but I don't acknowledge it, does that nullify the warning?

Steve
Click to expand...
 
Thanks for the confirmations everyone. I was pretty sure that I was right and my friend was wrong, but he wouldn't believe me without "proof". C'est la vie!
 
Black-Balled said:
Yes. The Supreme Pool Court has decided that hiding your head in the sand will keep you safe
Click to expand...

Dude... You ain't right. But somethin tells me you already knew that. Maybe you're... left... :grin-square:
 
i have a question on top of the posters question:

if you are sitting in your chair, and the guy shoots at his second possible foul, misses the ball, and you yell out "That's two" or "your on two" and he says ok, then you proceed to hook him again and you dont SAY ANYTHING AS HE APPROACHES THE TABLE FOR HIS POTENTIAL THIRD FOUL, this would NOT techinically be loss of game, right. YOU MUST tell the guy when he is coming to the table on his potential third foul (not right after he makes his second foul)???? is this technically correct, it seems to be according to the wording of the rule.
 
rule

Vinnie said:
To start, here is the WPA Rule concerning 3 consecutive fouls...

6.14 Three Consecutive Fouls
If a player fouls three times without making an intervening legal shot, it is a serious foul. In games scored by the rack, such as nine ball, the fouls must be in a single rack. Some games such as eight ball do not include this rule.
The referee must warn a shooter who is on two fouls when he comes to the table that he is on two fouls. Otherwise a possible third foul will be considered to be only the second.

Now, my question...

For the 3-foul rule to be valid, if player A fouls, does it matter whether or not player B pockets any balls before player A makes a third consecutive foul?

The reason I ask is because last night a friend of mine told me that when he played the big Reno tournaments in the past, if player A fouls, the standing rule was that the 3-foul rule was not valid if player B pockets any ball after player A's 1st or 2nd fouls. In other words, if player A fouls, then player B MUST take ball-in-hand and play a safe, then if player A fouls again, then player B MUST take ball-in-hand and play another safe.
I told him that I did not think that this was correct. Has anyone ever played or heard of this strange rule?
Click to expand...
I think if they would insert the word[consecutive] in the 3 foul rule it would make it easy to explane!!!!!:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
stick8 said:
I think if they would insert the word[consecutive] in the 3 foul rule it would make it easy to explane!!!!!:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

It is in the title. Pretty clear to me.
 
It is clear. In 9-ball it's 3 fouls equals loss of game. It doesn't matter if your opponent makes a ball or plays safe, 3 fouls is a loss. Now, just to be clear, if you're on 2 fouls and the rack finishes you don't start the next rack on 2 fouls. They only stand in that rack only, they do not carry over.

As for 14.1, as far as I know, 3 fouls makes a total of minus 18 points. 1 point for the first one, one point for the second one, and one point plus minus 15 points for the third. I've never heard the shooting the cueball out of the kitchen rule so you'll have to wait for Bob to chime in on that one.
MULLY
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top