Second notice on three-foul rule

and your reasons are?

Fleece3 said:
I think the three foul rule is stupid, and should be dropped. One of my buddies recently played in the weekly tournament at Master's. He was playing a well known one pocket player. Well, all this guy wanted to do was play safe, and never pocket balls. In one game he had BIH with 3 OPEN balls on the table....HE PLAYED SAFE!! Since my buddy is a VERY SOLID player he did win the match. Afterwards, they had a conversation that went like this:

Buddy--"you should take up 3 cushion"
Opponent--"why do you say that?"
Buddy--"because there are no pockets on the table. So you will never be in danger of making a ball:eek: "
Click to expand...

Its hard to argue your logic... there isn't any.
What exactly do you want? You say the rule is stupid. What are your reasons?
You say your buddy's opponent played safe with BIH and 3 open balls on the table. Would your buddy rather watch his opponent run the balls and win the game or get back to the table after his opponent played safe and possible turn it around and win the game?

I can't understand why so many people are afraid of the 3 foul rule... :confused:
 
Well this is very similar to what happened to me at a tourny once. I broke the balls playin nine ball didnt make anything my opponent gets down and shoots the nine ball into a rail and walks away. I questioned him "was that a push?" He says yes of course it was wasnt it obvious? I said where im from you inform your opponent that you are going to push out. I mean for all i know he could have been tryin to kick at the one ball and miscued and hit the nine or something maybe he plays bad i dont know. Bottom line is he should have let me know his intentions b4 he shot.
 
Ed Simmons said:
I think if you allow yourself to get hooked 3 times in a row you deserve to lose the game. I also think if someone is good enough at their safety game to stick me on 3, they deserve full credit! This game is a lot more than just sinking balls.
Click to expand...

OK, let me put it this way. If you think 9 ball gets very little TV support know, imagine the LACK of TV support it would get if players start winning matches because of three fouls! It is the same reason the NBA inititated the 24 second shot shot clock. No one wanted to watch a team get a 6 point lead, and then play "keep away" for 5 minutes. It is called "POCKET BILLIARDS" for a reason.......POCKET THE DAMN BALLS!!!

9 Ball is a product...And as such, MUSH be marketed to the masses! Unless of course, you are happy playing in tourneys where 1st place is $2500.
 
9-ball MUSH?

Fleece3 said:
OK, let me put it this way. If you think 9 ball gets very little TV support know, imagine the LACK of TV support it would get if players start winning matches because of three fouls!

9 Ball is a product...And as such, MUSH be marketed to the masses! Unless of course, you are happy playing in tourneys where 1st place is $2500.
Click to expand...

Let me get this straight. You want to dumb-down the game so that the TV crowd will flock to their sets? Have you ever seen a TV game (with the current rules) won by the 3-foul rule? NO! And you think eliminating this rule is going to all of the sudden turn this game into a ratings dynamo? I don't think so.
 
Last edited:
OK. So let's just ask ourselves; "what's the other side of not having the 3-foul rule"????...It's not very pretty either...SPF=randyg
 
BigDaddyInc. said:
Well this is very similar to what happened to me at a tourny once. I broke the balls playin nine ball didnt make anything my opponent gets down and shoots the nine ball into a rail and walks away. I questioned him "was that a push?" He says yes of course it was wasnt it obvious? I said where im from you inform your opponent that you are going to push out. I mean for all i know he could have been tryin to kick at the one ball and miscued and hit the nine or something maybe he plays bad i dont know. Bottom line is he should have let me know his intentions b4 he shot.
Click to expand...

OMG - this happened to me a few months ago. I was up 6-2 and I was looking off to the right and not thinking about her break when my opponent shot a shot after her break. She acted so upset after the shot, I just thought she missed hitting the one ball and so I picked up the cueball. But, as soon as I did, I kind of all of a sudden realized she must have rolled out (by the lay of the table). I asked her and she said yes, she did roll out, but I never heard her say it. I (incorrectly?) said she has ball-in-hand now - I touched the cueball; that's a foul. I should have asked if she rolled out, but I simply picked up the cueball because of the way she reacted after she shot. I just wasn't thinking clear... but she should have made sure I acknowledged the roll out... I didn't even hear her, but I wasn't paying attention anyway.

So, I give her ball in hand, she makes the 1-9 and she is down only 6-3. I probably thought since I was up so far, it shouldn't make a difference anyway. Well, she ended up playing better the rest of the set and came back and beat me 6-7.

eeek!
 
randyg said:
OK. So let's just ask ourselves; "what's the other side of not having the 3-foul rule"????...It's not very pretty either...SPF=randyg
Click to expand...
Yeah... That's why I suggested making it a 4 or 5 foul rule...

That way you get the benefit of keeping the game flowing and not stalemating, as the rule was designed to do.

Yet at the same time, it reduces the chances of cheesy wins.

And gives the players a little extra time for smart tactical play.

So it changes the cheesy to more tactical, which is always much more enjoyable.
 
randyg said:
OK. So let's just ask ourselves; "what's the other side of not having the 3-foul rule"????...It's not very pretty either...SPF=randyg
Click to expand...
The other side is to play it like 8-ball where there is a stalemate if there is no progress in the game. I think that would not happen very often. In my experience, if the 3-foul rule did not exist, people would try for more run-outs.

I think "no 3-foul rule" is worth trying in a major tournament. It is clearly a large problem in heavily-handicapped league matches when the better player decides to bury the newbie on every shot.
 
Tournaments

Most of the 9 ball tourneys I play in play by Texas Express except no 3 foul rule. They exclude it, and why I don't know because it is part of the rules.
 
In most cases, the 3-foul rule is self-policing... meaning, very few players intentionally try to win that way unless the lay-out of the balls is such that a win that way is semi-ensured.

But, occasionally, the rule is necessary because a stalemate would occur without it.

My buddy and I were practicing 10-ball a week back... and I broke, coming up dry and leaving the 1-ball in the jaws of a corner pocket but with two other balls positioned such that there was NO WAY that a legal hit could be made on the 1-ball... even with BIH. Without a 3-foul rule, the game is a stalemate. With a 3-foul rule, my opponent is forced to break up the mess in front of the corner pocket because he'll 3-foul before I will.
 
Bob Jewett said:
The other side is to play it like 8-ball where there is a stalemate if there is no progress in the game. I think that would not happen very often. In my experience, if the 3-foul rule did not exist, people would try for more run-outs.

I think "no 3-foul rule" is worth trying in a major tournament. It is clearly a large problem in heavily-handicapped league matches when the better player decides to bury the newbie on every shot.
Click to expand...

We actually have a local tournament that had the 3 foul rule eliminated due to "Abuse".

There were 2 players (1 male , 1 Female) that would actually try to win games using it as a strategy rather than a way out. For example, they would break and instead of planning a runout...they started hiding the CB.

It didn't work all the time (and almost never against the better players), but it worked often enough that the pool room owner took it away out of fear for their safety.
 
ne14tennis said:
We actually have a local tournament that had the 3 foul rule eliminated due to "Abuse".

There were 2 players (1 male , 1 Female) that would actually try to win games using it as a strategy rather than a way out. For example, they would break and instead of planning a runout...they started hiding the CB.

It didn't work all the time (and almost never against the better players), but it worked often enough that the pool room owner took it away out of fear for their safety.
Click to expand...

In a rather important league match against an A+ level player, he tried to get me on 3 fouls in every game. It was probably the first time anyone of that caliber tried to consistently win that way against me and probably the first time in YEARS that anyone at any level has even tried.

Honestly, I thought it was one of the most bizarre strategies I've ever seen in my life considering how strong of an offensive player he is but we did end up going hill-hill.


People are occasionally going to test the limits on the 3-foul rule. Some need to test those limits a little often. There eventually comes a day when the player who is constantly safing is going to run into a strong pocketer who will shoot right through them. All it takes is a few losses like this and the defensive player begins to realize they need to pocket balls.
 
If I am playing someone and it is OBVIOUS that they are trying to 3 foul me, they don't need to warn me. I will wait for them to say I three fouled after my third foul, just in case they aren't paying attention, but I will never pull the "You needed to verbally warn me" line.
 
Sweet Marissa said:
Playing three-foul as a strategy is dirty and shows lack of skill, IMO. But if a player *happens* to three-foul, and that rule is in effect, then take the win. But the opposing player should have the courtesy and class to inform his opponent with a warning after the second and before the third.
Click to expand...

I agree with several of the posts after mine. He tried to 3 foul me on several occasions and I finally said to him "You're not good enough at safeties to get me.....just play the game" and he stopped it.

We all later found out that he had "money ball phobia". He had a huge problem with runouts in that he would dog the 7-8-9 and let his opponent win the game with just a few shots.
 
ne14tennis said:
We actually have a local tournament that had the 3 foul rule eliminated due to "Abuse".

There were 2 players (1 male , 1 Female) that would actually try to win games using it as a strategy rather than a way out. For example, they would break and instead of planning a runout...they started hiding the CB.

It didn't work all the time (and almost never against the better players), but it worked often enough that the pool room owner took it away out of fear for their safety.
Click to expand...
Tap tap tap

Good post...

And instead of eliminating the 3 foul rule altogether (which creates its own set of problems) there is a simple remedy with the rule, which has already been mentioned but not discussed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top