Rule interpretation for Frozen Ball

homepc

homepc

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
In APA, here is the official rule for a frozen ball:

"Once it is agreed the ball is frozen the
player must drive the object ball to another rail (of
course, it could hit another ball, which in turn hits
a rail) or drive the cue ball to a rail after it touches
the object ball."

My question is......is the terms "another rail " literal? Can the frozon object ball after it is hit witht the cue ball come off the rail, hit another object ball, and then come back to the same rail and be legal? or is that still a foul? Second, are the cushions on either side of the pockets considered differant rails? Or would it have to hit the end rail if its frozen to the side rail?
 
homepc said:
in apa, here is the official rule for a frozen ball:

"once it is agreed the ball is frozen the
player must drive the object ball to another rail (of
course, it could hit another ball, which in turn hits
a rail) or drive the cue ball to a rail after it touches
the object ball."

my question is......is the terms "another rail " literal? Can the frozon object ball after it is hit witht the cue ball come off the rail, hit another object ball, and then come back to the same rail and be legal? Or is that still a foul? Second, are the cushions on either side of the pockets considered differant rails? Or would it have to hit the end rail if its frozen to the side rail?
Click to expand...


no

yes

no

yes

no

:)
 
homepc said:
In APA, here is the official rule for a frozen ball:

"Once it is agreed the ball is frozen the
player must drive the object ball to another rail (of
course, it could hit another ball, which in turn hits
a rail) or drive the cue ball to a rail after it touches
the object ball."

My question is......is the terms "another rail " literal? Can the frozon object ball after it is hit witht the cue ball come off the rail, hit another object ball, and then come back to the same rail and be legal? or is that still a foul? Second, are the cushions on either side of the pockets considered differant rails? Or would it have to hit the end rail if its frozen to the side rail?
Click to expand...

Oh may god ,you must be a lawyer..lol
 
homepc said:
In APA, here is the official rule for a frozen ball:

"Once it is agreed the ball is frozen the
player must drive the object ball to another rail (of
course, it could hit another ball, which in turn hits
a rail) or drive the cue ball to a rail after it touches
the object ball."

My question is......is the terms "another rail " literal? Can the frozon object ball after it is hit witht the cue ball come off the rail, hit another object ball, and then come back to the same rail and be legal? or is that still a foul? Second, are the cushions on either side of the pockets considered differant rails? Or would it have to hit the end rail if its frozen to the side rail?
Click to expand...

Yes you can hit a rail and then come back to the same rail and it's a legal shot.







Now that I'm rereading your post I think misread it the first time. you're saying if it never hit's another rail but just hits another ball and comes back to the same rail? I'm not sure that's a legal hit.
 
Last edited:
I believe a "force follow" of the cue ball to a ball frozen on a rail is also a legal hit as long as the cue ball moves visibly away from the rail before masséing back and hitting the same rail again.

Is this actually true?
 
homepc said:
In APA, here is the official rule for a frozen ball:

"Once it is agreed the ball is frozen the
player must drive the object ball to another rail (of
course, it could hit another ball, which in turn hits
a rail) or drive the cue ball to a rail after it touches
the object ball."

My question is......is the terms "another rail " literal? Can the frozon object ball after it is hit witht the cue ball come off the rail, hit another object ball, and then come back to the same rail and be legal? or is that still a foul? Second, are the cushions on either side of the pockets considered differant rails? Or would it have to hit the end rail if its frozen to the side rail?
Click to expand...

I don't know about APA, but no "other" cushion is needed in the World Standardized Rules (this also makes the question about cushions on either side of a pocket irrelevant) :

World Pool-Billiard Association
World Standardized Rules
Effective 1/1/2008

http://www.wpa-pool.com/index.asp?content=rules_tournament

6.3 No Rail after Contact
If no ball is pocketed on a shot, the cue ball must contact an object ball, and after that contact at least one ball (cue ball or any object ball) must be driven to a rail, or the shot is a foul. (See 8.4 Driven to a Rail.)

8.4 Driven to a Rail
A ball is said to be driven to a rail if it is not touching that rail and then touches that rail. A ball touching at the start of a shot (said to be “frozen” to the rail) is not considered driven to that rail unless it leaves the rail and returns. A ball that is pocketed or driven off the table is also considered to have been driven to a rail. A ball is assumed not to be frozen to any rail unless it is declared frozen by the referee, the shooter, or the opponent.
Click to expand...

pj
chgo

P.S. I think that in both APA and WPA/BCA the cue ball can hit a rail-frozen OB and then the CB can hit the same rail for a good hit - i.e., the OB itself doesn't necessarily have to hit anything after leaving the rail.
 
Last edited:
The object ball, if froze to a rail, is dead to that rail. If the object ball comes off the rail that it is froze to, contact another ball, and then hit's the same rail that it was froze to, AND nothing else touched a rail (ANY RAIL, including the rail that the object ball was froze), it is a foul.

If any other ball contact that rail after initial contact with your object ball, including the cue ball, it is a legal hit.

Hope this helps.
 
Neil said:
This tells me that in APA, it has to hit a different rail, not come back and hit the same rail. No comment on whether or not it is a stupid rule.:D
Click to expand...

Well, I'm not afraid to comment. That rule is just plain stupid. Any ball contacting any rail after the CB hits the OB should be legal.
 
MitchAlsup said:
I believe a "force follow" of the cue ball to a ball frozen on a rail is also a legal hit as long as the cue ball moves visibly away from the rail before masséing back and hitting the same rail again.

Is this actually true?
Click to expand...

No. The cue ball doesn't have to move away from the rail before hitting it; it just has to hit an OB first. So the CB could hit an OB that's frozen to the rail and then the CB could hit that same rail and it's a legal shot (as long as the OB is hit first).

pj
chgo
 
homepc said:
In APA, here is the official rule for a frozen ball:

"Once it is agreed the ball is frozen the
player must drive the object ball to another rail (of
course, it could hit another ball, which in turn hits
a rail) or drive the cue ball to a rail after it touches
the object ball."

My question is......is the terms "another rail " literal? Can the frozon object ball after it is hit witht the cue ball come off the rail, hit another object ball, and then come back to the same rail and be legal? or is that still a foul? Second, are the cushions on either side of the pockets considered differant rails? Or would it have to hit the end rail if its frozen to the side rail?
Click to expand...
Of your 5 questions the 2nd one is a poser, because I don't believe it is addressed in the rules. My logic is that arguments might arise as to whether or not the ob returned to the rail with help from a groove which sometimes runs along the base of the rail. Maybe not.
 
homepc said:
In APA, here is the official rule for a frozen ball:

"Once it is agreed the ball is frozen the
player must drive the object ball to another rail (of
course, it could hit another ball, which in turn hits
a rail) or drive the cue ball to a rail after it touches
the object ball."

My question is......is the terms "another rail " literal? Can the frozon object ball after it is hit witht the cue ball come off the rail, hit another object ball, and then come back to the same rail and be legal? or is that still a foul? Second, are the cushions on either side of the pockets considered differant rails? Or would it have to hit the end rail if its frozen to the side rail?
Click to expand...
Must hit one of the other rails. You can not double kiss it back to the rail even if it could be called.
 
Last edited:
Here is what the WPA rule says:

8.4 Driven to a Rail
A ball is said to be driven to a rail if it is not touching that rail and then touches that rail. A ball touching a rail at the start of a shot (said to be “frozen” to the rail) is not considered driven to that rail unless it leaves the rail and returns.

Mark
 
Ponytail said:
The rule that a frozen ball must contact some other rail before it, itself makes the hit legal is APA and BCA. WPBA appears to be slightly different as stated above.

Here is the link to the BCA page: (which they're calling World Standardized rules)
http://www.bca-pool.com/play/tournaments/rules/rls_gen.shtml
Click to expand...

I interpret the rule here at 3.38 (d) to mean that part two of the original question would be a legal hit. Frozen ball comes off the rail and contacts another ball then returns back to the original rail making it a legal hit.

Quote from the rule:
A ball which is touching a cushion at the start of a shot and then is forced into a cushion attached to the same rail is not considered to have been driven to that cushion unless it leaves the cushion, contacts another ball, and then contacts the cushion again.

I have no idea what's the ruling for APA.
 
Ponytail said:
The rule that a frozen ball must contact some other rail before it, itself makes the hit legal is APA and BCA. WPBA appears to be slightly different as stated above.

Here is the link to the BCA page: (which they're calling World Standardized rules)
http://www.bca-pool.com/play/tournaments/rules/rls_gen.shtml
Click to expand...

That's not right ponytail. Your own link tells you so as far as BCA goes, see 3.38, which is crystal clear in saying that if you hit a frozen object ball, cause it to leave the frozen rail, hit another ball and then return to contact the same rail, it fufils the 'rail' requirement to constitute a legal shot.

In respect of the above type of shot WPA Rules have the same effect, as by the way uk style 8 ball rules (all versions) also do and IPT applied the rule the same way. In fact every tournament I've ever played in worldwide has applied the rule in the WPA/BCA way. I've never played APA but they would seem to be the only exception if they do actually apply the rule the way they have written it.

It seems the APA rule drafters have chosen chose to word their rules in such a way that on literal interpretation that kind of same rail contact would not fulfil the requirements of a legal shot. Whether that's what they intended to do (ie make their rules different from everyone else's in that respect) or whether it was just clumsy wording, I wouldn't know, nor would I know whether in the event of a dispute an APA rules official would actually apply that rule the literal way it is written or whether he would deal with it in the way all other rule sets do.

Somebody on here knows the answers to those two unknowns though :)

Edit...didn't see your post arriving while drafting mine dabarbr, sorry for some of the repetition.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top