Who Wrote the WPA 10-Ball Rules ? They need to be put in front of a firing squad !

[Cuebacca]

I can easily see your problem with the wei scenario. But, my point is- how is that any different than any other safety? The shooter gets out of line and plays a lock up safety. Then gets ball in hand and runs out the last couple of balls.

I don't think anyone has addressed your question yet, so I'll give it a shot (no pun intended ). In call-shot, it's generally a lot easier to play safe because when you can pocket the ball and play safe, you don't have to worry about the final position of the object ball. When you pocket the object ball, you're essentially playing safe on a new object ball, which is not moving. I think that's a lot easier than having to worry about both the cue ball a moving object ball.

Rotation games are the only ones where this would be significant. In 8-ball, if I'm solids, it doesn't matter if I pocket my ball or not on a safe, because you will not be shooting for that solid anyway; you'll be shooting for a stripe. In 14.1, if I pocket a ball and play safe, you can still shoot at any other ball. So it's just the rotation games that have this built-in issue with safeties when it's call shot.

In my opinion, if it must be call shot, there should be a restriction where if any ball is pocketed on a safety, the incoming player has the option to pass the table back. Of course, this takes away the two-way shots. So, IMO, call shot 10-ball just doesn't work. I think slopping balls in is rare enough that we shouldn't worry about it.

IMO, the new WPA rules are throwing out the baby with the bath water.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I worded it poorly. By "all balls" I didn't mean any ball going in, but calling a specific ball to be made, basically eliminating most fluke shots.

Flex

Oh, right - I didn't think it all the way through or I would have known what you meant. Call-shot one pocket might be interesting, but then you'd eliminate all those bank/carom/combo shots that give the bangers a chance to look good.

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I don't understand how you can say this. Take a look at the particular example that was drawn up, with and without the shot/call safety rule. If you were the person sitting in the chair and your opponent screws up position from the 8 to the 9, wouldn't you want him to get punished for being so careless?

Well, in this case (as Cuebacca pointed out), the principle is that a called safety eliminates the need to control OB speed and makes safeties too easy in rotation games where there's only one next ball to shoot at.

That's a good point, but one carefully chosen example doesn't prove anything (you could find carefully chosen examples to support opposing views too). And it has nothing to do with wanting to punish the player for getting out of line. That happens in all games - it's why safeties exist.

But I think I agree after all that called safeties are too easy in rotation games.

pj
chgo

 

[SirBanksALot]

No need to go "generation gap" on me. Before TE, games used to be
won by the best player, not by the best jumper,or the luckiest kicker!

Right, wrong or indifferent I have to agree with SJD on the subject of jumping and luck.

Maybe it is a bit generational but theres no denying that jumping lessens the value of hiding the white rock and playing safe.

(By the way, SJD is among the best kickers and "finesse" players to ever play the game.)

 

[Scottster]

THe new WPA 10 ball rules have obliterated any chance to save rotation pool. The simple fix to all of the f&&king B1tching and moaning about the nine ball rack was obviously too damn simple to leave alone... adding the tenth ball.

Nothing else was wrong with 9-ball except the "trick shot" on the break.

 

[Russ Chewning]

And then, in their infinite wisdom, they decided to allow a player to shoot directly through a frozen ball. Push it, shove it, bang it, whatever. It's all legal now.

LOL... A certain One Pocket run out versus Jimmy Fusco comes to mind...

(I know, I know.. You were just taking advantage of the rules, Jay-man!)

Russ

 

[jay helfert]

LOL... A certain One Pocket run out versus Jimmy Fusco comes to mind...

(I know, I know.. You were just taking advantage of the rules, Jay-man!)

Russ

Russ, you've been reading way too many pool books.
By the way, I shot across the ball, not directly thru it. Okay ref?

 

[JB Cases]

No need to go "generation gap" on me. Before TE, games used to be
won by the best player, not by the best jumper,or the luckiest kicker!

Not true. I like 2 foul 9-ball as well but it's not correct that the "best" player always won the game or the set.

Rolling out was just a challenge and often the shooter would take the flyer and get lucky. It was a different game but had plenty of luck in it as well.

Anyway, without the advent of Texas Express rules we wouldn't have seen the rise in kicking skills nor the rise in jumping skills.

I haven't read the new ten ball rules but I don't know why they have to be such a departure from the way the game has been played historically.

On top of that, just like 9 ball, promoters and leagues will just alter the rules any way that they want to.

People wonder why pool won't go mainstream as a sport. It's because there is no other sport where there is such disparity in how it's played throughout the world. I can't think of another sport which has so many variations, rules, and governing bodies.

Anyway, the WPA is mostly a volunteer organization on a very short budget. I don't agree that a firing squad is in order but perhaps there should be something to identify the icons of our sport to get their input on things like monumental rule changes.

 

[poolmouse]

9.5 and 9.8

[snip]
9.5 Shots Required to Be Called
[snip]
9.8 Standard Fouls
[snip]
The following are standard fouls at nine ball:
[snip]
Slow Play
[snip]

Tap...tap...tap...I think I can get to like 10 ball.

Poolmouse (who loathes 9 ball)

 

[Flex]

Oh, right - I didn't think it all the way through or I would have known what you meant. Call-shot one pocket might be interesting, but then you'd eliminate all those bank/carom/combo shots that give the bangers a chance to look good.

pj
chgo

Well, if you think Ike Runnels is a banger....

Brandon Shuff was in a one-pocket tournament playing against Ike who according to Brandon fluked in a ball and then ran out....

Brandon was teed off...

I call it serendipity... getting a good roll...

Flex

 

[poolstar31]

Yes, it is exactly like call shot 8-ball and that's the problem.

The making a ball and calling a safety on the last 2 balls of a game puts in backwards in a skill factor and makes it exactly like 8-ball. If you want 8-ball just play 8-ball.

Well said Mike. What were they thinking?

 

[Bob Jewett]

Who Wrote the WPA 10-Ball Rules ?

From what I've heard....

At the WPA General Assembly at the end of November, the new revision of the rules for 8-ball, 9-ball, 14.1, and black ball was accepted. At the same time, it was decided to propose rules for 10-ball. This was because -- as has been pointed out multiple times by several people -- 9-ball is fundamentally flawed because of the rack and break rules. Ed Smith, one of the BCA representatives to the WPA General Assembly, was given the task of proposing a preliminary version of the 10-ball rules, getting feedback from the various national federations and confederations and forwarding the finished set to the WPA. If you would like to contact Ed, I think his email is available on the BCA website at http://www.bca-pool.com/play/instruction/BCA_Instructors_Reserve.htm

My own feeling is that we should simply add a ball and be done with it. There is no good reason to change the other rules of the game, IMNSHO. If we do want to experiment with the rules, then I would prefer to look at other -- more drastic -- changes to see how they work:

At 9-ball, the second shot of each rack must be a push-out.

At 9-ball, the breaker gets the second shot. (This might require longer sets.)

Go back to two-foul shoot-out. You can push out at any time, which is a foul, but the only penalty is that your opponent can have you shoot again. Two fouls in a row, even by different players, gets ball in hand for the one who did not commit the second foul.

As for an earlier comment about the WPA, it is not a European organization. Either the poster was confused or he was trying to make a subtle political statement. The WPA rules committee had people from the US, Canada, the Caribbean, South Africa, Taipei, and Europe, and took email input from the other countries that wanted to make suggestions.

 

[jay helfert]

From what I've heard....

At the WPA General Assembly at the end of November, the new revision of the rules for 8-ball, 9-ball, 14.1, and black ball was accepted. At the same time, it was decided to propose rules for 10-ball. This was because -- as has been pointed out multiple times by several people -- 9-ball is fundamentally flawed because of the rack and break rules. Ed Smith, one of the BCA representatives to the WPA General Assembly, was given the task of proposing a preliminary version of the 10-ball rules, getting feedback from the various national federations and confederations and forwarding the finished set to the WPA. If you would like to contact Ed, I think his email is available on the BCA website at http://www.bca-pool.com/play/instruction/BCA_Instructors_Reserve.htm

My own feeling is that we should simply add a ball and be done with it. There is no good reason to change the other rules of the game, IMNSHO. If we do want to experiment with the rules, then I would prefer to look at other -- more drastic -- changes to see how they work:

At 9-ball, the second shot of each rack must be a push-out.

At 9-ball, the breaker gets the second shot. (This might require longer sets.)

Go back to two-foul shoot-out. You can push out at any time, which is a foul, but the only penalty is that your opponent can have you shoot again. Two fouls in a row, even by different players, gets ball in hand for the one who did not commit the second foul.

As for an earlier comment about the WPA, it is not a European organization. Either the poster was confused or he was trying to make a subtle political statement. The WPA rules committee had people from the US, Canada, the Caribbean, South Africa, Taipei, and Europe, and took email input from the other countries that wanted to make suggestions.

Ed Smith! Now there's a prominent name in the billiard industry. Let Ed make the rules! Way to go BCA!

 

[Bob Jewett]

Ed Smith! Now there's a prominent name in the billiard industry. Let Ed make the rules! Way to go BCA!

He didn't make the rules. He had the task of getting feedback and assembling the rules.

 

[9 on the snap]

What is this 10 ball that you speak of? I am a simple caveman who can't count past 9.

 

[jay helfert]

He didn't make the rules. He had the task of getting feedback and assembling the rules.

Your words Bob. "He had the task of proposing a preliminary version of the rules". My question is, who is he? And why is he qualified to do this job? And who did he talk to before submitting his "version" of the rules?

Perhaps he would have been wise to speak with people like Mike Janis, Randy G., Mike Zuglan, Tommy Kennedy, 'Ironman', Evelyn Dysart, Greg Sullivan, Mark Griffin or maybe even me. You know people who work on tournaments, and have for years. But why ask us, what would we know that Ed already doesn't?

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Perhaps he would have been wise to speak with people like ... maybe even me. ...

If you want to be involved with the development and evolution of the rules of pool, I urge you to contact your national federation and volunteer.

 

[catscradle]

Mike, Jay, anyone else.
I don't see the big problem with one rule that seems to be objected to strenuously. The call shot rule, why is that a problem? I'm not saying it isn't, just want more explaination why you think it is.

 

[jay helfert]

If you want to be involved with the development and evolution of the rules of pool, I urge you to contact your national federation and volunteer.

I did for 15 years. I volunteered to be on the BCA Rules Committee by the way. I'm still waiting for that first phone call.

 

[Bob Jewett]

Mike, Jay, anyone else.
I don't see the big problem with one rule that seems to be objected to strenuously. The call shot rule, why is that a problem? I'm not saying it isn't, just want more explanation why you think it is.

I think call shot at 10 ball has three problems:

"Did he call it?" That's come up a few times in the idiotic ESPN format. Is an "obvious" ball into an "obvious" pocket OK?

It changes the strategy some, as in the illustration above. I'm not sure yet that the result is a bad game, but it is certainly different.

The last point is that to me it seems to be a needless difference from the rules of nine ball. That's at least a little confusing to some. It's hard to expect the players to know the rules when there are lots of small, pointless differences either over time or between similar games.

One of the suggestions in the preliminary discussion of 10-ball was that the ten should not count on the break if made in a foot pocket. At least we avoided that one.