scoop shot is it legal???

Some call it crap others call it rules of physics. If your cue ball is not heavier than the object ball then you are never going to make it travel past the objet ball collision point even if you use a crochet mallet.

It's definitely possible, just difficult (and even people that can do it will probably double hit the ball more often than they make a good hit and make the cue ball follow).
 
I believe I've seen Massey demonstrate that you're wrong but I can't find the video. It was an old ESPN match where he has a short appearance during a commercial break and does a 30 second clip on this topic. Maybe somebody will know and post it.
Mike was probably demonstrating power draw and/or follow with the balls close. Here is a technique for smaller draw shots: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GKiI5XPlJs
 
But it doesn't look like the demo shot illustrates the described technique. It looks like just a quick nip with the hand/wrist rather than stopping the stroke with the forearm or elbow.

You're right, not a particularly good example of the "run out of stroke" technique. It is a legal, close draw, though. A similar stroke can be used for a legal follow shot in that situation, but you better have a good ref watching.
 
Last edited:
No, if they are frozen, and you shoot straight through the centers of both balls, then they have to go together straight. However, it is not hard to make it look like one is shooting straight through the centers, and not actually do so, but hit the cb at a slight angle. Unless one is intent on watching the straightness of the stroke, it could easily be missed hitting at an angle on the final stroke.

My opponent during our state tournament had the object ball and cue ball frozen together, both directly lined up with the corner pocket. I got up to look at shot, to analyze the situation so I knew what was going to be legal and what to expect for a reaction on a legal hit. What I said earlier was that the cue ball should have gone straight along with the object ball, instead it went into the cushion at between and 45 degree and 90 degree angle even though he was shooting object ball and cue ball straight away from him. I asked if he thought he had made a legal hit, I knew he double hit the cue ball, he must have hit the cue ball with the ferule at some point for it to take off on the tangent line it did. He said he felt it was a legal hit. I was simply pointing out that even though the rules are supposed to make calling "good" and "bad" hits easier, sometimes it does not work.
 
My opponent during our state tournament had the object ball and cue ball frozen together, both directly lined up with the corner pocket. I got up to look at shot, to analyze the situation so I knew what was going to be legal and what to expect for a reaction on a legal hit. What I said earlier was that the cue ball should have gone straight along with the object ball, instead it went into the cushion at between and 45 degree and 90 degree angle even though he was shooting object ball and cue ball straight away from him. I asked if he thought he had made a legal hit, I knew he double hit the cue ball, he must have hit the cue ball with the ferule at some point for it to take off on the tangent line it did. He said he felt it was a legal hit. I was simply pointing out that even though the rules are supposed to make calling "good" and "bad" hits easier, sometimes it does not work.

Ok, I understand what you are saying. To make things even more complicated, I was looking at the VNEA rules yesterday, and with balls frozen together, you HAVE to shoot at a 45 degree angle to the balls. You aren't even allowed to shoot straight through them!

To what you described above, it sure sounds like it very well could have been a miscue on the cb to make it go off at that much of an angle. ??
 
Back
Top