Rule question

[terhje]

1. Can the player take an intentional scratch with his shaft? I remember i saw Efren do this in a match from the late 90s, were he was forced to do the opening break. Has the rule chanced?

2. If the player is forced to open after a 3 consecutive foule, can he take another foul when he opens again? or do the normal opening rules apply, where if he dosent do a good break, i can make him open again.

ty

 

[stevekur1]

1. Can the player take an intentional scratch with his shaft? I remember i saw Efren do this in a match from the late 90s, were he was forced to do the opening break. Has the rule chanced?

2. If the player is forced to open after a 3 consecutive foule, can he take another foul when he opens again? or do the normal opening rules apply, where if he dosent do a good break, i can make him open again.

ty

Hey Terje,

In an official game, the tip must come in contact with the CB for it to be a proper foul. doing otherwise may be considered an Unsportsmanlike Foul i believe

After 3rd foul on a rebreak, all opening break rules apply !

hope this helps until more knowledge steps in !! LOL
-Steve

 

[Pushout]

1. Can the player take an intentional scratch with his shaft? I remember i saw Efren do this in a match from the late 90s, were he was forced to do the opening break. Has the rule chanced?

2. If the player is forced to open after a 3 consecutive foule, can he take another foul when he opens again? or do the normal opening rules apply, where if he dosent do a good break, i can make him open again.

ty

I saw a lot of guys tap the cue ball with the ferrule instead of the tip in the early/mid '70s. Only in casual or money matches though, not in tournament play.
It would be called unsportsmanlike in tournament play, I'm sure.
I believe the opening break rules apply and no, you can't make him break again unless he again commits three consecutive fouls again.

 

[AtLarge]

... In an official game, the tip must come in contact with the CB for it to be a proper foul. doing otherwise may be considered an Unsportsmanlike Foul i believe...

Yes, but I believe tip contact is not enough. The player must make a "shot." Here's the WPA definition of a shot:

8.2 Shot
A shot begins when the tip contacts the cue ball due to a forward stroke motion of the cue stick. A shot ends when all balls in play have stopped moving and spinning. A shot is said to be legal if the shooter did not foul during the shot.​

So "a forward stroke motion of the cue stick" is required, not just barely touching the OB with the tip from above or below. I think a lot of people violate this requirement.

 

[Pushout]

Yes, but I believe tip contact is not enough. The player must make a "shot." Here's the WPA definition of a shot:

8.2 Shot
A shot begins when the tip contacts the cue ball due to a forward stroke motion of the cue stick. A shot ends when all balls in play have stopped moving and spinning. A shot is said to be legal if the shooter did not foul during the shot.​

So "a forward stroke motion of the cue stick" is required, not just barely touching the OB with the tip from above or below. I think a lot of people violate this requirement.

A shot committing an intentional foul?

 

[stevekur1]

Yes, but I believe tip contact is not enough. The player must make a "shot." Here's the WPA definition of a shot:

8.2 Shot
A shot begins when the tip contacts the cue ball due to a forward stroke motion of the cue stick. A shot ends when all balls in play have stopped moving and spinning. A shot is said to be legal if the shooter did not foul during the shot.​

So "a forward stroke motion of the cue stick" is required, not just barely touching the OB with the tip from above or below. I think a lot of people violate this requirement.

So how come i have seen some pretty notable players Air bridge and touch the top of the cueball so it doesnt move for fouls 1 and 2 ?? is that allowed ?

-Steve

 

[AtLarge]

A shot committing an intentional foul?

Yes. Otherwise it should be unsportsmanlike conduct.

In the heat of battle, with frayed nerves and high pressure, it can be difficult to actually make a "stroke" and still only slightly move the OB. But doing so produces a legitimate intentional foul with a 1-point penalty.

On the other hand, just touching the tip to the OB, from above for example (even to the point of "pinning" the OB to the table with the cue), is much easier, and my reading of the rules says it should not be permitted -- referee's discretion as to what the penalty would be.

 

[AtLarge]

Steve -- there is also another version of an improper intentional foul when the CB is frozen to or near the rack. Some people bring the tip of the stick up against the CB and then just push the stick forward slowly, moving the OB into the pack and rearranging things a bit. By my reading of the rules, that is not a proper "shot" and should be met with an unsportsmanlike-conduct call by a referee.

 

[dmgwalsh]

Calling Bob Jewett

This is an interesting issue and I would like it if Bob Jewett would weigh in.

I saw the old accu-stats tape with Efren tapping the cue ball with his ferrule in an effort to take an intentional foul, for which he was penalized 30 (the penalty for three in a row at that time was 30) and I believe a rebreak, same as 3 in a row. Since that time I have always assumed that as long as you tapped with the tip and not the ferrule, the shot was just a one point foul. That is the way we have been playing it for years in our league. And if you want to just push a little, so that the rack is rearranged, that was ok, too.

If we have been wrong, I would like to have the WPA rule makers weigh in, and point us to the particular rules that dictate the result. If that is the case, then a mass re-education is in order because people just tap their tip into the balls everywhere.

 

[Pushout]

This is an interesting issue and I would like it if Bob Jewett would weigh in.

I saw the old accu-stats tape with Efren tapping the cue ball with his ferrule in an effort to take an intentional foul, for which he was penalized 30 (the penalty for three in a row at that time was 30) and I believe a rebreak, same as 3 in a row. Since that time I have always assumed that as long as you tapped with the tip and not the ferrule, the shot was just a one point foul. That is the way we have been playing it for years in our league. And if you want to just push a little, so that the rack is rearranged, that was ok, too.

If we have been wrong, I would like to have the WPA rule makers weigh in, and point us to the particular rules that dictate the result. If that is the case, then a mass re-education is in order because people just tap their tip into the balls everywhere.

I think it was a 25 point penalty plus the 3 fouls in a row for 28 but I agree, we always played this way also.

 

[AtLarge]

This is an interesting issue and I would like it if Bob Jewett would weigh in. ...

Dennis -- this topic of what is or isn't a legitimate intentional foul came up two years ago. Here's the thread. The thread starts with a discussion of a different situation/rule, but it gets to the one we are discussing here in post #30. Bob Jewett was one of the discussants.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=156475

 

[dmgwalsh]

Intentional Foul

Dennis -- this topic of what is or isn't a legitimate intentional foul came up two years ago. Here's the thread. The thread starts with a discussion of a different situation/rule, but it gets to the one we are discussing here in post #30. Bob Jewett was one of the discussants.

http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=156475

Some of this was discussed and answered by Bob Jewett. He said you could not do the move where you put your cue tip near the base of the ball and lift up because it is not a stroke.

I am wondering about what everyone does and gets away with. Tapping the top of the cue ball with the tip. This should not be good either because it is not a stroke, right?

 

[Rich R.]

IMHO, raising the tip up, from the base of the cue ball and tapping the top of the cue ball with the ferrule or the side of the tip do not constitute a stroke and could be considered unsportsmanlike, as others have indicated. However, also IMHO, jacking up and hitting straight down on the cue ball should be a legal stroke. After all, it is the same stroke used to masse a cue ball. The only difference is tip placement on contact with the cue ball.

Any thoughts on this?

Frankly, I believe a player should try to improve their position even when taking an intentional foul. Therefore, I think the player should use a legitimate stroke and hit the cue ball farther into the pack or behind a ball, etc. I wouldn't just tap the ball and risk an unsportsmanlike foul.

 

[Bob Jewett]

I think taking a foul on the top of the ball should be legal as mentioned above because it is like a mini-masse. The stick is moving forward along its axis when it contacts the cue ball and all of the contact is with the chalked surface of the tip.

What to call in other situations is a problem. It is too bad that many of the top players -- and presumably many more of the rest of us -- are unclear on the rules, and not just the rules about permitted strokes. I feel that the players can be expected to know the rules and that the referee should not be allowed to answer questions about the rules and interpretations of them. That's how snooker does it, but the rules for snooker rarely change. Pool, on the other hand, has had quite a few changes and changes back over the last 40 years or so, and it's understandable that the players might be confused.

The current pool rules allow the ref to explain the rule -- see Regulation 9 on the WPA site for an explanation. The kicker is that if the ref gets the explanation wrong, the player has no recourse -- the shot is governed by the actual rule and not the ref's mistaken statement.

 

[Bob Jewett]

A different problem is what to do with shot in which the player brings the tip up to the cue ball very softly and manipulates the balls into the desired position over the better part of a second or two. I know that such "strokes" have been played "traditionally" but I think they should not be permitted. Exactly how to word the rule is not clear.

 

[dmgwalsh]

I think taking a foul on the top of the ball should be legal as mentioned above because it is like a mini-masse. The stick is moving forward along its axis when it contacts the cue ball and all of the contact is with the chalked surface of the tip.

What to call in other situations is a problem. It is too bad that many of the top players -- and presumably many more of the rest of us -- are unclear on the rules, and not just the rules about permitted strokes. I feel that the players can be expected to know the rules and that the referee should not be allowed to answer questions about the rules and interpretations of them. That's how snooker does it, but the rules for snooker rarely change. Pool, on the other hand, has had quite a few changes and changes back over the last 40 years or so, and it's understandable that the players might be confused.

The current pool rules allow the ref to explain the rule -- see Regulation 9 on the WPA site for an explanation. The kicker is that if the ref gets the explanation wrong, the player has no recourse -- the shot is governed by the actual rule and not the ref's mistaken statement.

Just so I am clear, Bob, would it be sufficient to just tap the cue ball with the tip or is a mini stroke required?

As an aside, at the World's when someone made an illegal opening break, not hitting the rails with the two balls and the cue ball after contact, the ref started to rack the balls. I told him the player has his choice and he said, "No that rule was changed a few years ago." I told him it was the three foul rule option to take the table as is that had been changed. The player said it doesn't matter. I was going to have him re break anyway.

I went to the WPA web site on my ipad and got the rule and asked the ref later if he wanted to see it. He said that he did not want to see it.

Someone also told me that a ferrule to the cue ball was going to result in loss of game, but I never verified that interpretation. The cue ball being grabbed on the way into the pocket was used as a 15 point foul three times involving one player, but they did not re rack. It may have been used other places, too.

A different problem is what to do with shot in which the player brings the tip up to the cue ball very softly and manipulates the balls into the desired position over the better part of a second or two. I know that such "strokes" have been played "traditionally" but I think they should not be permitted. Exactly how to word the rule is not clear.

Bobby Hunter taught this at a seminar a few years ago. Some guys did not want to do it because it did not feel right.

I have done this. Is it legal or is it unsportsmanlike and open to penalty?

This is a heckuva place to have uncertainty in the rules because the consequences of one interpretation or another could determine the outcome.

 

[AtLarge]

... I am wondering about what everyone does and gets away with. Tapping the top of the cue ball with the tip. This should not be good either because it is not a stroke, right?

Right! Bob's comment applies to that situation as well -- "The only way you are permitted to intentionally change the position of the balls in play is by a shot on the cue ball. That must be with a forward stroke."

 

[Bob Jewett]

Just so I am clear, Bob, would it be sufficient to just tap the cue ball with the tip or is a mini stroke required?

The tap should be with a (small) forward (along the axis of the stick) motion.

As an aside, at the World's when someone made an illegal opening break, not hitting the rails with the two balls and the cue ball after contact, the ref started to rack the balls. I told him the player has his choice and he said, "No that rule was changed a few years ago." I told him it was the three foul rule option to take the table as is that had been changed. The player said it doesn't matter. I was going to have him re break anyway.

I went to the WPA web site on my ipad and got the rule and asked the ref later if he wanted to see it. He said that he did not want to see it.

It's hard to find good help. In an ideal and better organized world, such a tournament would have had qualified referees, and perhaps even would have had a training session before the tournament.

Someone also told me that a ferrule to the cue ball was going to result in loss of game, but I never verified that interpretation. The cue ball being grabbed on the way into the pocket was used as a 15 point foul three times involving one player, but they did not re rack. It may have been used other places, too.

Tapping the cue ball with a ferrule for the third foul penalty shows that the player doesn't know the rules. It's too bad that they didn't have time to go over the rules with the players. I think that's an important function of any major tournament -- to provide a knowledge check for the players.

Bobby Hunter taught this at a seminar a few years ago. Some guys did not want to do it because it did not feel right.

I have done this. Is it legal or is it unsportsmanlike and open to penalty?

This is a heckuva place to have uncertainty in the rules because the consequences of one interpretation or another could determine the outcome.

Which technique was being taught? The ferrule tap?

The player who is taking the foul has control. He is allowed to learn the rules and take a legal, permitted shot.

 

[dmgwalsh]

Which technique was being taught? The ferrule tap?
[/QUOTE]


No, the rearranging of balls you mentioned:


Originally Posted by Bob Jewett
A different problem is what to do with shot in which the player brings the tip up to the cue ball very softly and manipulates the balls into the desired position over the better part of a second or two. I know that such "strokes" have been played "traditionally" but I think they should not be permitted. Exactly how to word the rule is not clear.
Bobby Hunter taught this at a seminar a few years ago. Some guys did not want to do it because it did not feel right.

I have done this. Is it legal or is it unsportsmanlike and open to penalty?

This is a heckuva place to have uncertainty in the rules because the consequences of one interpretation or another could determine the outcome.

 

[AtLarge]

The tap should be with a (small) forward (along the axis of the stick) motion. ...

So, Bob, just to be clear:

You are the referee. The match is being played under WPA rules. A player holds the stick vertical or nearly vertical and taps straight down or nearly straight down (which would be "along the axis of the stick") and the OB really doesn't move at all (in fact, it may have been "pinned" between the tip and the table). What's your call? Is it a legitimate intentional foul or is it unsportsmanlike conduct (in addition to being a foul)?