What do you think?

tigerseye

tigerseye

Kenny Wilson
Silver Member
I was keeping score the other night and i was having a hard time figuring out if this person was shooting defense or what... They clearly could not pocket the ball so they hit it and left the CB on the rail for a difficult shot.
I asked if that was defensive and they replied...nope i was just trying to make a good hit....
hmmm....
So what do you think????:confused:
 
pocket

tigerseye said:
I was keeping score the other night and i was having a hard time figuring out if this person was shooting defense or what... They clearly could not pocket the ball so they hit it and left the CB on the rail for a difficult shot.
I asked if that was defensive and they replied...nope i was just trying to make a good hit....
hmmm....
So what do you think????:confused:
Click to expand...

In the APA, if you are not "offensively" trying to pocket a ball, then it is a defensive shot.
One year in Vegas, the ref said that our guy didn't hit the ball hard enough to actually be trying to make it (a bank) - so it is defensive!

Larry
 
What is especially interesting is when a two-way shot is employed (a shot with offense AND defense in mind). For example, in the below scenario, any decent shot-maker will immediately call the bottom-left corner pocket and win the game but a savvy low-rank player might shoot the bank shot knowing a miss will leave their opponent nothing. Here, I would mark defense if missed even though they were clearly going for a shot.

CueTable Help

 
Any non offensive shot is a safety...I got in an argument at Nationals last year with a ref when he ruled a kick shot a safety, normally no big deal but the way the match played out they had me down for over 10 safeties and we barely had that amount of innings. I was ducking a lot but not that much. If you kick hard its not a safety but if u kick to barely make contact it's still a safety in APA. How bout that ish???
 
Jude Rosenstock said:
What is especially interesting is when a two-way shot is employed (a shot with offense AND defense in mind). For example, in the below scenario, any decent shot-maker will immediately call the bottom-left corner pocket and win the game but a savvy low-rank player might shoot the bank shot knowing a miss will leave their opponent nothing. Here, I would mark defense if missed even though they were clearly going for a shot.

CueTable Help

Click to expand...

Thats a bit insane. :D
Would you still mark it defensive if it goes in the pocket?

I can see marking it if they have no intentions of it going but just becuase they shoot a smart OFFENSIVE shot doesnt mean that it should be marked defensive.

Good to see you bak online Jude. Have seen you on here in a while!
How did your BCA go?

BTW-- where can I find a couple of these low skilled savvy players?? :D
 
This is one of the many reasons I left the APA. When I was young and beginning to learn pool, I was taught to call safety. I did the same thing in APA and people would still argue. It's not worth the effort just so you can remove an inning from my match.
 
frankncali said:
Thats a bit insane. :D
Would you still mark it defensive if it goes in the pocket?

I can see marking it if they have no intentions of it going but just becuase they shoot a smart OFFENSIVE shot doesnt mean that it should be marked defensive.

Good to see you bak online Jude. Have seen you on here in a while!
How did your BCA go?

BTW-- where can I find a couple of these low skilled savvy players?? :D
Click to expand...


The point I'm making about marking defensive shots is, sometimes you have to wait for the outcome in order to make a ruling. Obviously, if the ball goes in, it's offense. If it doesn't go in, the shooter has played safe.


Regarding BCA, I had an okay showing. I wasn't very happy about how i was playing overall but I had these decent moments here and there. I won my first three in singles (don't know how). Thereafter, my poor play caught up with me. In scotch, we took 33rd out of 395 which was a lot of fun. In Master Team, we finished 12 of 13. I had about a .500 record in that event and was really happy about it, too!
 
I almost forgot, one the main "problem" drunks that used to play missed the urinal, he got really p1ssed when I asked him if that was defensive.
 
On my team we always ask each other.

Shooter shoots ambiguous shot, scorekeeper asks "defense?", shooter answers yes or no. I don't know what the other team's scoresheet is going to say, but I always know ours is accurate.

-Andrew
 
Andrew Manning said:
On my team we always ask each other.

Shooter shoots ambiguous shot, scorekeeper asks "defense?", shooter answers yes or no. I don't know what the other team's scoresheet is going to say, but I always know ours is accurate.

-Andrew
Click to expand...

thats kind of how it is done here. Mainly certain people never seem to have defensive shots marked. Everyone assumes that the lower rated players never miss on purpose.

If anyone rattles the pocket and it doesnt go yet leave the cueball in a tough position for their opponnet I cant mark that a defensive shot. They were honestly trying to make the ball.

As for asking or letting scorekeepers know... how about this one..

In nationals we are playing a team and each time they are going to play a safety they would turn to the scorekeepers and say safe then shoot.

I could not believe that even the ref didnt understand why it was wrong. Even two teams next to us didnt...UNTIL I explained it to them. The ref actually looked like a lightbulb went off in his head when it dawned on him.

They received a sportsmanship warning but they did it a couple more times. Ref warned them again saying a penalty would happen if it continued. Not sure what they would have done.

They were pissed. I just asked them how they would like it if on every shot for the rest of the match my guys lined up and pointed to where he wanted the CB to end up AND then called timeout. I could refuse each time if he was on the right track. They seemed to understand then but still thought what they were doing wasnt hurting.
 
Jude Rosenstock said:
What is especially interesting is when a two-way shot is employed (a shot with offense AND defense in mind). For example, in the below scenario, any decent shot-maker will immediately call the bottom-left corner pocket and win the game but a savvy low-rank player might shoot the bank shot knowing a miss will leave their opponent nothing. Here, I would mark defense if missed even though they were clearly going for a shot.

CueTable Help

Click to expand...

I must disagree. If an attempt is made to make the shot it is not defense. Now if the ob only came half way back up the table, I might consider it.

Steve
 
pooltchr said:
I must disagree. If an attempt is made to make the shot it is not defense. Now if the ob only came half way back up the table, I might consider it.

Steve
Click to expand...

That is part of the problem with marking APA safeties then, isn't it? This is clearly a two-way shot. I'm not saying ALL two-way shots should inherently be labeled as safeties if missed. I am saying, however, if the shooter takes a more difficult offensive shot because of the added benefit of defense, they should be marked for a defensive shot if they miss.
 
frankncali said:
In nationals we are playing a team and each time they are going to play a safety they would turn to the scorekeepers and say safe then shoot.

I could not believe that even the ref didnt understand why it was wrong. Even two teams next to us didnt...UNTIL I explained it to them. The ref actually looked like a lightbulb went off in his head when it dawned on him.

They received a sportsmanship warning but they did it a couple more times. Ref warned them again saying a penalty would happen if it continued. Not sure what they would have done.

They were pissed. I just asked them how they would like it if on every shot for the rest of the match my guys lined up and pointed to where he wanted the CB to end up AND then called timeout. I could refuse each time if he was on the right track. They seemed to understand then but still thought what they were doing wasnt hurting.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I see a problem with this. Whenever I play a defensive shot, I always try to say something to the scorekeepers like "mark that one" or "that was D". What's wrong with doing it before the shot? "Guess I have to play defense on this one".

Steve
 
Safety

Jude Rosenstock said:
That is part of the problem with marking APA safeties then, isn't it? This is clearly a two-way shot. I'm not saying ALL two-way shots should inherently be labeled as safeties if missed. I am saying, however, if the shooter takes a more difficult offensive shot because of the added benefit of defense, they should be marked for a defensive shot if they miss.
Click to expand...

I disagree.
Here it is from the APA manual:
Defensive Shots: A defensive shot is a shot where the shooter deliberately misses so as to pass his turn at the table on to his opponent. A safety is a defensive shot because the shooter had no intention of making a ball of his category. Intention is the key word. Sometimes intent can be a matter of opinion and judgment, but the scorekeeper’s judgment must be accepted by the opposing player. Remember that defensive means deliberately missed.


IF the shooter has the intention of making the ball and leaves a hard shot - it is not a safety, rather it is just a good miss ;-)

Larry
 
Exactly! Intent to make a ball is the one determining factor as to whether a shot is defense or not.

Here's a question, based on that rule. The shooter is hooked on his ball, and his only option is to kick at it. That ball is sitting right in the middle of a cushion. You know the shooter (let's say an SL3) will do well just to get a good hit. Do you mark it at defense, since the only real intent was to make sure they got a good hit? Even though the player didn't have much of a chance of making the ball anywhere?

Steve
 
pooltchr said:
Exactly! Intent to make a ball is the one determining factor as to whether a shot is defense or not.

Here's a question, based on that rule. The shooter is hooked on his ball, and his only option is to kick at it. That ball is sitting right in the middle of a cushion. You know the shooter (let's say an SL3) will do well just to get a good hit. Do you mark it at defense, since the only real intent was to make sure they got a good hit? Even though the player didn't have much of a chance of making the ball anywhere?

Steve
Click to expand...

This is exactly why this rule does not work and I hear the conversation come up all the time.
 
frankncali said:
In nationals we are playing a team and each time they are going to play a safety they would turn to the scorekeepers and say safe then shoot.

I could not believe that even the ref didnt understand why it was wrong. Even two teams next to us didnt...UNTIL I explained it to them. The ref actually looked like a lightbulb went off in his head when it dawned on him.

They received a sportsmanship warning but they did it a couple more times. Ref warned them again saying a penalty would happen if it continued. Not sure what they would have done.

They were pissed. I just asked them how they would like it if on every shot for the rest of the match my guys lined up and pointed to where he wanted the CB to end up AND then called timeout. I could refuse each time if he was on the right track. They seemed to understand then but still thought what they were doing wasnt hurting.
Click to expand...

That's strange....because if you look at the sportsmanship award nomination form, one of the items listed as good sportsmanship is "Opponent announced defensive shots before making them"

Not sure I agree with the refs call.
 
pooltchr said:
Exactly! Intent to make a ball is the one determining factor as to whether a shot is defense or not.

Here's a question, based on that rule. The shooter is hooked on his ball, and his only option is to kick at it. That ball is sitting right in the middle of a cushion. You know the shooter (let's say an SL3) will do well just to get a good hit. Do you mark it at defense, since the only real intent was to make sure they got a good hit? Even though the player didn't have much of a chance of making the ball anywhere?

Steve
Click to expand...

Every call is based on the judgement of the scorekeeper. If the scorekeeper sees that the hit is just barely hard enough to score a hit on the object ball, then there was no attempt to pocket a ball. Since there's no need to call a pocket, a hit that sends the object ball across the table to another rail was not defensive as the object ball had an opportunity to fall into any pocket within its range.
 
cueguy said:
In the APA, if you are not "offensively" trying to pocket a ball, then it is a defensive shot.
One year in Vegas, the ref said that our guy didn't hit the ball hard enough to actually be trying to make it (a bank) - so it is defensive!

Larry
Click to expand...

they don't allow defensive shots in vegas?

i heard something about only being allowed to play 2 safes. is that true?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top