You Make the Call!

JAM

JAM

I am the storm
Silver Member
The names have been withheld to protect the innocent, but this is not a hypothetical and actually did occur during a UPA-sanctioned tournament earlier this year.

Player A is standing by, getting ready to slam the stack, as Player B racks the balls.

Player A, with all of his mighty strength, aims for the rack and accidentally misses his contact point on the cue ball, but touches it ever so slightly, causing it to move forward a few inches ahead of the kitchen string.

Without hesitation, quick-thinking Player A immediately strikes the cue ball a second time, within a split second, this time causing the cue ball to hit the stack of racked balls.

Player A, realizing he double-hit the cue-ball, runs to the end of the table, gathers up all the balls to re-rack the stack, and hands Player B the cue ball, informing him that it is now his break.

In a local pool room, a friendly debate ensued recently about the above-referenced incident. I was surprised to hear the variety of viewpoints and opinions as to what should have happened next.

Some folks thought that this was, indeed, a foul and that Player A should lose the break and allow Player B to carry on by re-breaking the balls.

Other folks think Player A should have never dismantled the balls after his double-hit break and has committed a foul. The balls should have been left the way they were and the game should have continued on since contact was made with the rack, but with Player B having ball in hand.

Another school of thought is that since the cue ball never made contact with the stack on the first try, the game does not actually begin until there is a "legal break."

I have witnessed this happening on more than one occasion in a variety of venues.

What should have happened next? Remember, Player A has double-hit the cue ball, causing it to strike the stack. Player A then gathered the balls and re-racked them, handing Player B the cue ball.

This scenario happens more often than one would think. Keeping in mind all of the above variables, you make the call!

JAM
 
This is a really good one.

I would think it might actualy be a forfeit of game.

Did he just not like the layout thinking it was an easy run for the opponent so he intentionally disrupts the balls. Or just an instinctive action and after the break he opologizes and turns over the ball. Would he have done the same thing if he had broken in the 9. I dont think so. Its a question of charecter.
But as for the black and white text I think it would end up being a forfeit of game

Like this one

If you were like really hard hooked and a foul would cause an easy early 9. And you just walked up and knocked the 9 ball away with your cue so the oponent wouldnt have the combo, What would you call that, a foul, or a forfeit
 
I think Player B should have had the option to either take ball in hand after the break or rerack and break himself.
 
maximillion said:
If you were like really hard hooked and a foul would cause an easy early 9. And you just walked up and knocked the 9 ball away with your cue so the oponent wouldnt have the combo, What would you call that, a foul, or a forfeit
Click to expand...

That would automatically be loss of game, no questions asked. Anytime you intentionally move an object ball, even with your cue, you lose the game. If you intentionally move the cueball, like just flick it with your hand or something, it's ball in hand.

As for the question in this thread, a legal break was NOT made. The balls were broken with the cueball outside of the kitchen. The game should not be played out, they should be reracked with the other person getting the break.
 
JAM said:
This scenario happens more often than one would think. Keeping in mind all of the above variables, you make the call!

JAM
Click to expand...

Hi JAM,
At one point many of us thought that u have variation in rules from place to place only in 8 Ball.I am finding out now the same problem exhists with 9 Ball too.The awnser to your question depends on tournament rules and the tournament director.If the tournament director is Scott Smith( My buddy and is a Mr.Nice Guy.He is a bleeding heart and tries to defend the wrong doers and underdogs) he will ask to rerack the balls and player B to break.In my opinion it is forfeit of the game by player A for grabing the balls.If player A argues about the decision I will declare player B as the winner of the match. Peace on Earth
Vagabond
 
Last edited:
BCA Rule Book: 2.19 Illegal moving of ball = loss of game. But I think this refers to bumping the table.

In the above instance at the very least it was a double hit on the cueball.

3.9: On the break shot, stopping or deflecting the cue ball after it has crossed the head string and prior to hitting the racked balls is considered a foul and loss of turn. The opponent has the option of receiving cue ball in hand behind the head string or passing the cue ball in hand behind the head string back to the offending player.

So according to 3.9 once player A hit the CB and it crossed the headstring that was a foul. But then he took another swing at the ball.

How many times do we see that during a match at local tournaments on shots other than the break. The player accidently moves the CB and then he quickly strikes it again. This usually results in BIH.

Can't find that in the rulebook. Interesting. Maybe it should be loss of game.

Jake
 
Lesson to be learned

vagabond said:
...At one point many of us thought that u have variation in rules from place to place only in 8 Ball.I am finding out now the same problem exhists with 9 Ball too.The awnser to your question depends on tournament rules and the tournament director.If the tournament director is Scott Smith( My buddy and is a Mr.Nice Guy.He is a bleeding heart and tries to defend the wrong doers and underdogs) he will ask to rerack the balls and player B to break.In my opinion it is forfeit of the game by player A for grabing the balls.If player A argues about the decision I will declare player B as the winner of the match....
Click to expand...

The reason why I initiated the thread was to emphasize the lesson to be learned.

Just as expected, there have been a variety of viewpoints expressed here, much like the opinions generated the other night at my local pool hall.

I have since researched this incident and know the correct answer. The rules absolutely do vary, and when a player comes to the table uncertain of them, they are at a disadvantage, to include Player A and Player B, who, as it turned out, each suffered a consequence from not having the benefit of knowing the preexisting rules ahead of time. Knowledge is power!

JAM
 
JAM said:
The reason why I initiated the thread was to emphasize the lesson to be learned.

Just as expected, there have been a variety of viewpoints expressed here, much like the opinions generated the other night at my local pool hall.

I have since researched this incident and know the correct answer. The rules absolutely do vary, and when a player comes to the table uncertain of them, they are at a disadvantage, to include Player A and Player B, who, as it turned out, each suffered a consequence from not having the benefit of knowing the preexisting rules ahead of time. Knowledge is power!

JAM
Click to expand...

Not only is knowledge power, in some cases, it is also confidence.

Someone asked on another thread about confidence and I've always had more of it if I know the exact rules of play. Last year at the state tourney, I re-read the Valley rulebook and found some interesting little tidbits that could be used sometimes. I felt very confident about this aspect of my game.

I see what the BCA says, but what does the professional rulebook (UPA?) say about this rule, JAM?

Do tell, do tell,

Jeff Livingston
 
Player A fouled.
Player B should have received ball in hand.
Player A's action of snatching-up the balls and racking, should be considered a forfeit.

Tracy
 
At the Gulf Coast Classic my opponent was on the hill in one pocket. He made a really nice long cut and sank the winning ball. I picked up the remaining ball before the cue ball stopped. The cue ball went the length of the table very slowly and scratched. I forfeited the game as I had moved an object ball.

Is this not correct?, Pel
 
RSB-Refugee said:
Player A fouled.
Player B should have received ball in hand.
Player A's action of snatching-up the balls and racking, should be considered a forfeit.

Tracy
Click to expand...

That's my opinion, too.

Still, as JAM researched it , I look forward to finding out whether we're right.
 
Imho

I'm of the opinion that 3 fouls occured resulting in loss of game. :confused:
This is a really good one! Waiting with baited breath for the answer.
 
Rules and Consistancy

UPA do they have rules? if so, why aren't they published?

There are many sets of rules (a major problem as I see it)

The Pros (at non-UPA events) have a set of rules that are more or less agreed upon at each tournament. Nothing really standard, but I have heard that Pat Flemming is the care-taker of the 'pro rules'.

All of the national league orgainizations (i.e. APA, VNEA, BCA) have their own rules. They are similar in a lot of ways, but different enough to make a player wonder why all the differences.

The World Standard Rules (adopted by the BCA in 1999) are the only set of rules that should matter (and even this is a matter of opinion). These are the rules that the rest of the world uses for their tournaments (or so it is claimed)

Even if you know all the rules, you have to ask 'which rules are we playing under?' before every tournament.

Texas Express rules are widely used in a lot of tournaments. But, TE doesn't cover 8 ball and does a poor job of One Pocket coverage.

Do you ever remember the rule in 9 ball that the One ball must be hit for the game to begin? This would eliminate a lot of confusion for the example JAM presented.

Simplify the rules. Standardize the rules for all leagues and tournaments. This can only help this game grow.

Legalize the scoop jump. Why not? Jump cues have made it just as easy? and eliminate the 'push rule', too difficult to explain or even judge. If you can make the shot, why not?

In fact, we migtht as well eliminate the side pockets too. Fours enough.
 
No brainer

JAM said:
The names have been withheld to protect the innocent, but this is not a hypothetical and actually did occur during a UPA-sanctioned tournament earlier this year.

Player A is standing by, getting ready to slam the stack, as Player B racks the balls.

Player A, with all of his mighty strength, aims for the rack and accidentally misses his contact point on the cue ball, but touches it ever so slightly, causing it to move forward a few inches ahead of the kitchen string.

Without hesitation, quick-thinking Player A immediately strikes the cue ball a second time, within a split second, this time causing the cue ball to hit the stack of racked balls.

Player A, realizing he double-hit the cue-ball, runs to the end of the table, gathers up all the balls to re-rack the stack, and hands Player B the cue ball, informing him that it is now his break.

In a local pool room, a friendly debate ensued recently about the above-referenced incident. I was surprised to hear the variety of viewpoints and opinions as to what should have happened next.

Some folks thought that this was, indeed, a foul and that Player A should lose the break and allow Player B to carry on by re-breaking the balls.

Other folks think Player A should have never dismantled the balls after his double-hit break and has committed a foul. The balls should have been left the way they were and the game should have continued on since contact was made with the rack, but with Player B having ball in hand.

Another school of thought is that since the cue ball never made contact with the stack on the first try, the game does not actually begin until there is a "legal break."

I have witnessed this happening on more than one occasion in a variety of venues.

What should have happened next? Remember, Player A has double-hit the cue ball, causing it to strike the stack. Player A then gathered the balls and re-racked them, handing Player B the cue ball.

This scenario happens more often than one would think. Keeping in mind all of the above variables, you make the call!

JAM
Click to expand...
This is in my opinion a no brainer. If no one knows the rules perse' of what rule belongs to what game then common sense should take over.Why would a double hit on the cue ball be any different than a scratch in the pocket on the break? The player commited a foul therefore, assuming Jam, you are playing 9 ball and Texas express rules, which u didn't clairfy but is important, then it is ball in hand. Now in 1 pocket that is not an option having ball in hand but the player would have commited a foul anyway, owe a ball and player b would shoot. The basic rule fo a foul on the break should be for all games. If you were old school and not playing texas express player b should get ball in hand behind the head string. As for the other opiniion about legal break, I play that way if it was not a foul but just a miscue or u didn't hit the balls then as a matter of professional courtesy I allow a rebreak and do not call a foul.

You mention you have seen this quite often. I find that amazing although possible I guess, but I have never seen it in 55 years of playing and watching pool. I have seen it happen on a regular shot during game as I have done it many times but never on the break. I have seen a lot of miscues on the break.
I am just being controversial cause your damn Redskins are kicking my Niners buts right now. Oh well their payroll is about 3 times ours, they should win once in awhile. LOL.
 
JAM said:
The names have been withheld to protect the innocent, but this is not a hypothetical and actually did occur during a UPA-sanctioned tournament earlier this year.
Click to expand...
If the game is 9-ball or 10-ball, Player B gets ball-in-hand anywhere on the table.

It's the TD's call, but cooler heads would simple re-rack the balls, again with Player B having full-table BIH.

That's what the BCA rules have for 9-ball. I believe the rules quoted in this thread (opponent has option to break) is for BCA 8-ball.

Fred
 
Under Texas Express rules I am told that it would not be a legal break so that means the correct option would be a re-rack with the same player breaking.

Surely you are not looking at APA rules although they clearly state that for the game to begin there has to be a legal break which calls for the one ball to be struck by the cue ball and four balls to hit a rail. Failure to accomplish this results in a re-rack and a break by the same player.

Depending on whose rules you are using the game starts a) when the cue ball leaves the kitchen or b) when the cue ball strikes the one ball.

So Jam, what is the proper answer? What kind of tournament was it? And what rules were they playing under?

Jake
 
Dang, there is NO right answer to this question, because 9-ball as a game does NOT exist. There are numerous different ways to play it - who in their right mind would gamble at it or compete at it without knowing all the rule specifics beforehand? Oh wait, I occasionally play in a 9 ball tournament locally; and I have NO IDEA what anyone should do in this situation. I just like to hit the pretty balls into the holes - especially that yeller striped one.
 
Familiarity with the rules...

Player A and Player B were competing in a UPA-sanctioned event, and the UPA rules and regulations are in force at all times.

When Player A lightly touched the cue ball in an effort to break, the cue ball passed the head string. This is a foul because the cue ball went over the line, and since two or more balls obviously didn't pass the side pocket, a foul resulted. If the cue ball had not passed the head string, Player A could have started all over again.

When Player A then double-hit the cue ball, he committed a second consecutive foul.

When Player A then ran to the other end of the table and gathered up the balls, unbeknownst to him, he conceded the game, which is another foul, actually a third consecutive foul.

When Player A conceded, according to the UPA rules, he forfeits a game.

Unfamiliarity with the rules has cost players games and even matches in some pro settings.

Rules should be made available to all players before the commencement of a formal tournament. In smaller events, players should make it a point to listen intently to the TD at the players meetings. All tournament directors, promoters, and professional organizations should have on hand an existing set of rules which cover every possible scenario, like what happened to Player A and Player B. In the end, the tournament director is the final ruling body and is the one to make the call.

JAM
 
Lesson Learned from Players A and B

In this actual incident, because of Players A and B's unfamiliarity with the current UPA rules in force, Player B never called a foul on Player A, which would have given him a free game. :eek:

And by the same token, if Player A was knowledgeable about the current UPA rules in force, the veteran globe-trotting player would have NEVER run to the end of the table to gather the balls. I believe after he double-hit the cue ball, a knee-jerk reaction, if you will, he reacted instinctively when he gathered the balls for a re-rack, thinking this was the generally accepted practice. :o

I remember reading about Rodney at the '02 or '03 WPC (can't remember) when he used his cue stick as a measuring device. The WPC rules state this is a no-no, and Rodney received a foul. Not a good thing when you're playing world-beaters who can run a 6-pack in the blink of an eye.

In front of the cameras, The Magician himself, competing in an ESPN 7-Ball Challenge in Baltimore, didn't verbally CALL the 7-ball in the pocket, which resulted in a foul; in this case, the cheese!

Veteran Karen Corr conceded a game to Keith McCready at a regional tournament in Berlin, CT in front of a packed house of spectators, which cost her a game. The rules are always announced at the players meeting, which many players take for granted and leave the premises during this time. It happened to Keith himself the week before at a Falcon Tour tourney when Nick "The Bald Guy" Prinsloo called a foul on Keith for conceding the last few remaining balls on the table. :mad: Nick beat Keith that match. Karen lost her match to Keith, and it was pretty close. Her not adhering to the Joss Tour rules cost her the match (IMO). :eek:

Knowlege is power, and the lesson learned here is that knowing the rules thoroughly before you compete in any event is just as important as having a jump cue in your case. It is a tool that is necessary when playing competitive pool.

JAM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top