Watching Allison and Gerda on TV, the referee watched a hit in slow motion on a monitor and determined that the cue ball made contact with both the 2-ball and the 7-ball at the exact same time, then ruled the hit good. By definition of having to hit the corect ball FIRST, this is a BAD hit. All simultaneous hits are fouls, not good. What's up with the call? Thoughts . . .
Woman's US OPEN Rule
- Thread starter BarTableMan
- Start date
I do not know how the rule is worded exactly - but I'm willing to bet it reads 'you have to hit your object ball first' this would mean an exact dual hit should be legal, if it says 'you cannot hit another ball first' then it would be illegal - sounds like random nitpicking...but there's a difference.
I first saw this in an essay a rather nerdy guy wrote about ties at first base in baseball. The rule in baseball says at first base the ball must beat the runner - therefore, in a tie, the runner wins. Funny enough - the rules also go on to say that at the other bases the runner must beat the ball....so the tie should go to the defense. When he raised this issue with the Umpire's association, the laughed at him and told him "There are no ties in baseball"
Just my random 2 cents.
I first saw this in an essay a rather nerdy guy wrote about ties at first base in baseball. The rule in baseball says at first base the ball must beat the runner - therefore, in a tie, the runner wins. Funny enough - the rules also go on to say that at the other bases the runner must beat the ball....so the tie should go to the defense. When he raised this issue with the Umpire's association, the laughed at him and told him "There are no ties in baseball"
Just my random 2 cents.
It is very unlikely that both balls were contacted at the same instant. A standard TV camera/monitor certainly isn't good enough to resolve hits a millisecond apart. Here is the WPA rule (actually a Regulation):
26. Split Hits
If the cue ball strikes a legal object ball and a non-legal object ball at approximately the same instant, and it cannot be determined which ball was hit first, it will be assumed that the legal target was struck first.
If the cue ball strikes a legal object ball and a non-legal object ball at approximately the same instant, and it cannot be determined which ball was hit first, it will be assumed that the legal target was struck first.
Regulations: http://www.wpa-pool.com/web/the_regulations
Rules: http://www.wpa-pool.com/web/the_rules_of_play
I mean i've seen alot of shots checked by a recording but not to make a determination during a match.
Think its going to be accepted as the norm soon?
Rule
Thank you Bob. Excellent response. With that rule it makes complete sense.
Thank you Bob. Excellent response. With that rule it makes complete sense.
Like Bob said, it's unlikely that it was a "split hit", which is exceedingly rare. Referees are taught to judge the hit by which direction the CB travels, after contact with the two OB's.
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
I was in attendance at this match, and what was more noteworthy than the ruling itself was that Gerda openly agreed with the referee's original determination that she had fouled. It was Allison Fisher that insisted on a videotape review of the shot, a fine display of sportsmanship at a critical moment in a short race final. Allison Fisher is a champion in more ways than I can count.
Last edited:
If the cue ball contacts two balls simultaneously how could it have hit one of them first?
Because it didn't hit either of them second. :grin:
There's that word again ASSUMED!!!!!!
Here we go boys was it immoral and did it show a lack of character
because the shooter didn't call a foul on themselves. LOL
:rotflmao1: :rotflmao1: :rotflmao1:
WPA Rule:
26. Split Hits
If the cue ball strikes a legal object ball and a non-legal object ball at approximately the same instant, and it cannot be determined which ball was hit first, it will be assumed that the legal target was struck first.
This sort of reminds me of another thread, I can't quite put my finger on it
let me think...
Here we go boys was it immoral and did it show a lack of character
because the shooter didn't call a foul on themselves. LOL
:rotflmao1: :rotflmao1: :rotflmao1:
WPA Rule:
26. Split Hits
If the cue ball strikes a legal object ball and a non-legal object ball at approximately the same instant, and it cannot be determined which ball was hit first, it will be assumed that the legal target was struck first.
This sort of reminds me of another thread, I can't quite put my finger on it
let me think...
Last edited:
After you call a few thousand of these "split hits" you kind of know when it's a good hit or a bad one. Most of the time you can tell by the path of the object balls and cue ball after contact, but sometimes even that is not conclusive. There is an internal mechanism in the brain that will decipher it for you if you allow it to. Your internal computer is the most accurate on Earth and it always tells me if I've just seen a bad hit or not. A little alarm bell goes off in my head telling me that something wasn't right about the shot. If there are no bells, I know it's a good hit.
This probably sounds crazy to most of you, but trust me when I tell you that our internal computer/brain is an amazing mechanism for discerning infinite variations in things. A couple of minor examples: When we measure the measle ball against the red circle cue ball they come up with almost exactly the same dimensions. But a good pool player can ascertain that they don't play the same due to minute differences in their composition. By the same token, just the way we play when we are in "dead stroke" is an example of allowing our inner brain to make decisions on how to hit the ball to successfully complete the shot. It seems so natural when it's happening.
Have you ever kicked a rock down the street and adjusted your steps to be in line to kick it again? Our brain is making instantaneous calculations that our conscious mind is not aware of. Any time you drive on a crowded freeway your brain is making a myriad of calculations about all the cars surrounding you CONSTANTLY! It's such an unconscious thing that for the most part you're unaware of it happening.
Okay, class over, you can laugh at your teacher outside. :wink:
This probably sounds crazy to most of you, but trust me when I tell you that our internal computer/brain is an amazing mechanism for discerning infinite variations in things. A couple of minor examples: When we measure the measle ball against the red circle cue ball they come up with almost exactly the same dimensions. But a good pool player can ascertain that they don't play the same due to minute differences in their composition. By the same token, just the way we play when we are in "dead stroke" is an example of allowing our inner brain to make decisions on how to hit the ball to successfully complete the shot. It seems so natural when it's happening.
Have you ever kicked a rock down the street and adjusted your steps to be in line to kick it again? Our brain is making instantaneous calculations that our conscious mind is not aware of. Any time you drive on a crowded freeway your brain is making a myriad of calculations about all the cars surrounding you CONSTANTLY! It's such an unconscious thing that for the most part you're unaware of it happening.
Okay, class over, you can laugh at your teacher outside. :wink:
I seem to remember a tie in the all-star game not too long ago.
I believe I read a feature on the BD website about 30 of greatest matches and one involved Sibel getting a foul called on him via replay in an ESPN match.