Rules ruling

NH Steve

Administrator
Joined
Apr 25, 2004
Messages
8,758
...And I suspect that you are the kind of guy that is used to having his pronouncements accepted without question, being eminently qualified as a TD and all.

I was having a very civil and informative discussion with NH Steve back in post #15, when I invited anyone to provide a reasoned argument in support of Steve's interpretation, or conversely against mine. You jumped in, in your post #16 with your proclamation as to how things in fact are. I guess you didn't read the reasoned argument part?

Subsequently, I have just tried to point out the several problems with your position, to which you appear to have taken some kind of offense.

Fact is the verbal description in rule 6.1 of the 1P. rules makes no sense. It totally ignores "path of ball" and completely omits movement of a second ball, and therefore it cannot provide a basis for what should be done when these things happen.

You have also referenced WPA 6.6 at least twice which is not the appropriate WPA rule for cueball only fouls. That rule is rule 20 in the Regulations section.

As a suggestion, someone in authority in 1P.org should correct the verbage in rule 6.1 so there would not be so much confusion.

Meanwhile, you may take your ball and go home; I have no doubt you have come as close to admission of error as you are going to come. Hopefully, you will be a better TD, and the rest of us will be less confused as a result of these discussions.
Rules are not perfect, and even if they were, the people policing them and the players involved are certainly not perfect. Therefore there will always be issues with rules. I know the 1P org rules are not perfect, and certainly the WPBA rules are also not perfect. I have no control or input beyond anyone else regarding the WPBA rules. The WPBA rules were changed after 2005 when we adopted ours so the reference to their rule in ours does need to be updated.

For Doc to say you were being contentious is not "name calling". I do not see anything about Doc's posts or anyone else's that are any more opinionated than your own. Rules are obviously something you care a lot about.

The section 20 WPBA rule is -- this is something we agree on I think -- not well written. As I read it, it is no where near as clear as it should be if they intend any touch of a second ball to be a foul. The problem that I see with it is that the first part of section 20 says not a foul "unless it changes the outcome of the shot". Because simply touching a second ball does not necessarily change the outcome of the shot in the slightest -- unless the cue ball or object balls pass too close to the disturbance such that the disturbance might have effected the outcome of the shot, as the rule goes on to say -- to me it does not seem clear that they intend the simple involvement of a second ball to be a foul, unless it changes the outcome of the shot or at least could possibly have changed the outcome.

The problem I see about arguing over the semantics of this rule is that it all comes back to the fact that the rule itself is poorly written, which we both agree on. Hence any reading of it kind of fails to clearly prove a point either way. You can't have it both ways -- either the rule is clear and one of us is right and the other wrong because it says so, in which case the rule is a rule and we can like it or not but it is tough to argue the interpretation because it is CLEAR. Or the rule is not clear, which means to me it does not prove either point exactly because it is not clear, and that is where I think we are at, lol.

I believe the most important thing in the section 20 regulation is the spirit of it -- "If there is no referee presiding over a match, it may be played using cue ball fouls only." When there is no referee, essentially it is up to the players to agree on what is a foul and what is not, much like in gambling. If they agree, then fine, let things continue. If they cannot agree, the TD or area ref is going to come over and make a ruling. Who knows how they would interpret section 20 :D Personally, I don't care if touching a second ball would be a foul or not, but I certainly would prefer the rules to be clearer!!

Our rules are due for an update -- we should make that a goal for the next year, which would make 10 years for those rules. Since our rules became "the standard" for One Pocket, they should be the best that they can be.

Again, I like the idea of "One touch warning" along with all ball fouls when there is no ref involved. And I have no objection to all ball fouls if there is a ref. But that's an argument/discussion for another day :D:D
 

gulfportdoc

Verified Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2004
Messages
9,603
Once again, the WPA rule applies:

"20. Cue ball fouls only
If there is no referee presiding over a match, it may be played using cue ball fouls only. That is, touching or moving any ball other than the cue ball would not be a foul unless it changes the outcome of the shot by either touching another ball or having any ball, including the cue ball, going through the area originally occupied by the moved ball. If this does not happen, then the opposing player must be given the option of either leaving the ball where it lies or replacing the ball as near as possible to its original position to the agreement of both players. If a player shoots without giving his opponent the option to replace, it will be a foul resulting in cue ball in hand for the opponent."
The distinction between a refereed and non-refereed match in regards touch fouls makes sense. If touch fouls were used in non-refereed matches, it would be like begging players to shark one another...:D

Incidentally, the CSI rules actually post a diagram to illustrate their notion of a disturbed ball having an effect on the outcome of the shot, which I haven't seen before. I couldn't get the diagram to copy, but the description itself is pretty explanatory:

"Effect on the outcome of the shot" means that either the disturbed ball contacts any ball set in motion as a result of the shot, or that the base of any ball set in motion as a result of the shot passes through the area originally occupied by the disturbed ball. That area is defined as a circle approximately seven inches in diameter centered on the position originally occupied by the disturbed ball (see Diagram 6).


~Doc
 

Artie Bodendorfer

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2005
Messages
4,271
Absolutely correct, Cary. Good post, you get it.

....and as we can all see by reading the rest of the rule you didn't highlight, there are two ways described in the rule itself that the outcome of the shot is deemed to have been changed: 1.)by either touching another ball, or 2.) having any ball, including the cue ball, going through the area originally occupied by the moved ball.

Thanks:D
In tournaments you need strict rules very clear and specific.
And they need to be clarified. No room for debate or conflict. Where a Ref or another person can make a quick and correct decision. I played Bugs about 25 times or more we never had a disagreement or a foul call. And if some one would ask did the pat the ball they owed.The answer was yes or no. And no more conversation. And we took each others word. And we never checked each others rack. Today they make it a all day thing to heck the rack. And we racked for each other. I guess that's the difference between pros that gamble. And tournaments players. All that silly stuff they go through is not necessary. I remember a decision came up. The two people called me up from Det. They were playing one pocket 20 thousand dollars and the wanted me to make a decision and ruling on the disagreement. This was a very tough decision to make, And they called me because they trusted me and would take whatever decision I would give. And whoever side I would give the decision too would win the game. So I said I am not giving a decision on the rule. Because the Decision I would give will be the winner of the game. So I said I do not what to make a decision on that will make one person or give the other person the winner in the game.They only fair decision I can come up with is to play the whole game over. And who ever broke the balls brakes the balls over again and you play the game over.. This is the only fair and correct decision I can give. And if both off you do not want to except my decision. Have someone else make a decision. Because I do not what to give a win loose decision. And two days latter they sent me 2 thousand dollars. Saying thank you for your fair decision.
 

SJDinPHX

Suspended
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Messages
9,226
Who Knows ????

Who Knows ????

Most rules are clearly defined, and leave little doubt as to their intent..There will always be quirky little things happen, which will strain the interpretation of those rules !.. As Artie said, he played Bugs 25 times, without a rule disagreement !...I don't remember all these 'rule infractions' coming up back in the older days either, when I was gambling for my hard earned cash....If they did, they were handled quite differently, and usually amicably. (often by flipping a coin :cool:)

To spend hours and hours, arguing those VERY rare, oddball occurrences, seems to me an exercise in futility !..A new one will come up next week !..No one can possibly cover ALL the different scenarios...If two players, or even a referee, cannot agree on the intent, or interpretation of any given rule, flip a coin and move on !..These are NOT life or death decisions..It happens in all other games/sports !..To agonize over it, seems a bit silly, and non-productive ! :rolleyes:

Even the NFL, NBA, MLB, and the PGA have questionable things come up all the time !..And they have been sophisticating, and clarifying their rules for over 100 years ! ..I say, give it a rest Darmoose and Doc...It ain't a perfect world ! :eek:

PS..Boy, it would be nice to hear, just once..."Makes perfect sense to me" ! (what are the odds on that Dr.Bill ?) :p
 
Last edited:

SJDinPHX

Suspended
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Messages
9,226
Steve, Everybody is entitled to their opinion. Those opinions that hold water are backed up by relevant fact and reason. People who can't defend their opinion without becoming offended probably should not offer them up, for that is how we, as a society, avoid chaos. <--Are you saying this rule sh*t could lead to World War III ?...YEE GAD !
Darbaby, PUHLEEEEEEZE read post #44...I believe you were typing your response, when I made my post..:frus

View attachment 10290
 
Last edited:

darmoose

Verified Member
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
1,611
Darbaby, PUHLEEEEEEZE read post #44...I believe you were typing your response, when I made my post..:frus

View attachment 10290
No Dick, no need for warring over this. I play one pocket almost every day and never get into disputes. As far as I am concerned this was just discussion for sake of discussion, but I failed to realize that even here, just like in politics, ain't nobody listening and nobody changing their mind about anything anymore.

Let's just go back to the name calling and insulting quips until somebody else croaks. Not very constructive, but certainly mind numbing and mildly entertaining.
 

tylerdurden

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,959
I think all human beings need to read "Notes from the Underground", and learn about the subject of "intentional suffering", or the thought that suffering is somehow an enjoyable part of the human condition. There are plenty of chances for the underground man to improve his life, but he seems to purposefully reject these excessively parsimonious paths (eg, it is a foul to touch a ball). In kind of a circle of confusion at the end, he rejects the one person that would be nothing but good for him. I think this guy was a one hole player.
 

gulfportdoc

Verified Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2004
Messages
9,603
PS..Boy, it would be nice to hear, just once..."Makes perfect sense to me" ! (what are the odds on that Dr.Bill ?) :p
From Doc:
The distinction between a refereed and non-refereed match in regards touch fouls makes sense. If touch fouls were used in non-refereed matches, it would be like begging players to shark one another...:D
I know that you were letting out a big horse laugh as you wrote your post, ole buddy, because how many dozens of threads over the years have you dragged out for days, arguing with and insulting various other posters over some small point?:D

~Doc
 

onepocket926

Verified Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Messages
744
In tournaments you need strict rules very clear and specific.
And they need to be clarified. No room for debate or conflict. Where a Ref or another person can make a quick and correct decision. I played Bugs about 25 times or more we never had a disagreement or a foul call. And if some one would ask did the pat the ball they owed.The answer was yes or no. And no more conversation. And we took each others word. And we never checked each others rack. Today they make it a all day thing to heck the rack. And we racked for each other. I guess that's the difference between pros that gamble. And tournaments players. All that silly stuff they go through is not necessary. I remember a decision came up. The two people called me up from Det. They were playing one pocket 20 thousand dollars and the wanted me to make a decision and ruling on the disagreement. This was a very tough decision to make, And they called me because they trusted me and would take whatever decision I would give. And whoever side I would give the decision too would win the game. So I said I am not giving a decision on the rule. Because the Decision I would give will be the winner of the game. So I said I do not what to make a decision on that will make one person or give the other person the winner in the game.They only fair decision I can come up with is to play the whole game over. And who ever broke the balls brakes the balls over again and you play the game over.. This is the only fair and correct decision I can give. And if both off you do not want to except my decision. Have someone else make a decision. Because I do not what to give a win loose decision. And two days latter they sent me 2 thousand dollars. Saying thank you for your fair decision.
....Trust.....now there's a novel idea.....I don't think it's in any of the rule books......maybe THEY need to put it back in.....:lol

....Playing the game over....is the best decision (since You weren't there to see the infraction)......it's a shame that the two players couldn't come up with that themselves (would have saved them $2,000 and You a nights sleep).....

.....I watched many times in the 60's if an argument occurred that couldn't be settled....the understood ruling was to play the game over....
 

LSJohn

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
7,787
...And I suspect that you are the kind of guy that is used to having his pronouncements accepted without question, being eminently qualified as a TD and all.

I was having a very civil and informative discussion with NH Steve back in post #15, when I invited anyone to provide a reasoned argument in support of Steve's interpretation, or conversely against mine. You jumped in, in your post #16 with your proclamation as to how things in fact are. I guess you didn't read the reasoned argument part?

Subsequently, I have just tried to point out the several problems with your position, to which you appear to have taken some kind of offense.

Fact is the verbal description in rule 6.1 of the 1P. rules makes no sense. It totally ignores "path of ball" and completely omits movement of a second ball, and therefore it cannot provide a basis for what should be done when these things happen.

You have also referenced WPA 6.6 at least twice which is not the appropriate WPA rule for cueball only fouls. That rule is rule 20 in the Regulations section.

As a suggestion, someone in authority in 1P.org should correct the verbage in rule 6.1 so there would not be so much confusion.

Meanwhile, you may take your ball and go home; I have no doubt you have come as close to admission of error as you are going to come. Hopefully, you will be a better TD, and the rest of us will be less confused as a result of these discussions.
The way I read it, you have done the most careful reading and interpretation of the 1p.org cue ball fouls only rule.

Thanks
 

Artie Bodendorfer

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2005
Messages
4,271
From Doc:

I know that you were letting out a big horse laugh as you wrote your post, ole buddy, because how many dozens of threads over the years have you dragged out for days, arguing with and insulting various other posters over some small point?:D

~Doc
I remember when Tommy Spencer was playing a nine ball session with a player from Texas named Gab and it was a very hard decision.And I didn't no Gab but his backer new me and they new I new Tommy Spencer very well. They were playing for 3 or 5 thousand dollars a race to 11. And the game was tied 10 10.And before I gave my decision I asked both players. Whatever decision I give Are you going to excepted my decision. And they both said yes. If one of you players don't want my decision ask someone else. Or flip a coin for the decision. And they both agreed. If you don;t clarify to both players to excepted your decision you give The player who gets the worst of the decision will say I didn't ask you to give your decision. And they wont excepted your decision. So you are back where you started. Both player want the decision there way. And we all no that some people love to start a argument so they wont loose. And Some times when they will not agree to the decision. I have called the backers too the side if they are playing for big money. I would say this isn't going no where. Because both sides what the best of the decision. And the decision I gave you cannot give in a tournament. And my decision would be call the whole session of. But the fairest and best decision is to start t'he game where it was played from. And if both players agree because they don't want to bet all the money on the one game play the session over. And it gives both players a good work out. In tournaments you cannot do that. So just play the one game over. Do not give a decision that will make one player the winner and the other player the looser. Unless its completely clear the foul was committed. Then you must go by the rule. And if the ref did not see the foul or what happened how can he give a correct and fair decision. He cannot so he has to leave it up to the 2 players to come up with a agreement. Never ask a spectator for what happened. Either go by the a replay or see what agreement or compromise both players will agree to. Or listen to what both player what and tell them you will make a fair decision from there for both players. You want both player to feel ok about the decision. You do not what to her one player saying the official robed me.Or Fu me. A fair decision and both player agreeing for you to give a decision is the best way to handle the problem. And you replace the conflicted with a solution. A fair solution and decision for both player. Rules are good and we need them.In touchy and close game the rule might not be the correct decision.Rules are not itched in stone. You see that. By what they have done to the constitution.
 

Artie Bodendorfer

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2005
Messages
4,271
From Doc:

I know that you were letting out a big horse laugh as you wrote your post, ole buddy, because how many dozens of threads over the years have you dragged out for days, arguing with and insulting various other posters over some small point?:D

~Doc
I remember when Tommy Spencer was playing a nine ball session with a player from Texas named Gab and it was a very hard decision.And I didn't no Gab but his backer new me and they new I new Tommy Spencer very well. They were playing for 3 or 5 thousand dollars a race to 11. And the game was tied 10 10.And before I gave my decision I asked both players. Whatever decision I give Are you going to excepted my decision. And they both said yes. If one of you players don't want my decision ask someone else. Or flip a coin for the decision. And they both agreed. If you don;t clarify to both players to excepted your decision you give The player who gets the worst of the decision will say I didn't ask you to give your decision. And they wont excepted your decision. So you are back where you started. Both player want the decision there way. And we all no that some people love to start a argument so they wont loose. And Some times when they will not agree to the decision. I have called the backers too the side if they are playing for big money. I would say this isn't going no where. Because both sides what the best of the decision. And the decision I gave you cannot give in a tournament. And my decision would be call the whole session of. But the fairest and best decision is to start t'he game where it was played from. And if both players agree because they don't want to bet all the money on the one game play the session over. And it gives both players a good work out. In tournaments you cannot do that. So just play the one game over. Do not give a decision that will make one player the winner and the other player the looser. Unless its completely clear the foul was committed. Then you must go by the rule. And if the ref did not see the foul or what happened how can he give a correct and fair decision. He cannot so he has to leave it up to the 2 players to come up with a agreement. Never ask a spectator for what happened. Either go by the a replay or see what agreement or compromise both players will agree to. Or listen to what both player what and tell them you will make a fair decision from there for both players. You want both player to feel ok about the decision. You do not what to her one player saying the official robed me.Or Fu me. A fair decision and both player agreeing for you to give a decision is the best way to handle the problem. And you replace the conflicted with a solution. A fair solution and decision for both player. Rules are good and we need them.In touchy and close game the rule might not be the correct decision.Rules are not itched in stone. You see that. By what they have done to the constitution.
 

wincardona

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
7,294
Steve,

If you could help us out with a ruling it would be great. Shooter "A" disturbs a ball with his cue that rolls up to and freezes against another ball. Shooter "B" calls a foul. Shooter "A" say's that the object ball that the disturbed ball froze to did not move and therefore he only moved one ball. Shooter "B" says that because the ball came in contact with another ball regardless of whether it could be determined that the second ball moved it is still a foul.

Help us out. Thanks,

Preacher Ronn
The way the rule reads yes it is a foul, however, rules of this kind should only be enforced in tournament play where you have a referee presiding over the match. I believe that discretionary rules are designed to keep the dignity of the game intact, and other than in tournament play there needs to be a sportsman like mentality by the players competing to keep the game fair and competitive.

Fortunately for the players that gamble and compete regularly there's a thing called "a reputation" Our reputation precedes us and therefore we should know what to expect before breaking the balls, and all discretionary rules should be addressed at that time and understood. Of course there may be a situation that comes up where the rule hasn't been discussed on how to handle it but imo that would be infrequent and too trivial to be concerned with. In that event we could then go to the "Bodendorfer rule" and play the game over, providing that it's agreeable with both parties.

Without this sort of an understanding there will always be squabbles, or even heated arguments about certain rules that are discretionary. Players are going to split hairs when there's something of significant value at stake, which would then end up in the kinds of arguments we are having now in this thread.:frus

Bill Incardona
 

onepocket926

Verified Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Messages
744
In touchy and close game the rule might not be the correct decision.Rules are not itched in stone. You see that. By what they have done to the constitution.
....You are absolutely right.....if The Government...can do what they want and change the Constitution (in the middle of the game).....then the rules of One Pocket can certainly bend a bit....to fit the situation......one size....does not fit all.....

.....if I understand Billy correctly....I wholeheartedly agree......if Players....had to put their "Reps"....on the line....when they argue past the point of reconciliation.......I believe there would be far less disputes at the table.....

......the measure of a "real Player"....is not necessarily being the best shot maker...or the person that knows the most moves...or the most rules .......these attributes have all been assigned separately to many Players.....but, the common thread of any true Player is how He/She conducts Themselves at the table......word gets around......faster than You think.....and with todays technology.....it can hit the next stop on Your Tour...before You get there.....

......picture Yourself as Jackie Gleeson in the Hustler.....powdering Himself up....straightening His Clothes....slapping on a lil' Cologne.....and when He went to the table....always a Gentleman.....even in the face of a loss...

....*steps down off His soapbox* :D
 

androd

Verified Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
7,160
As I said before if it's not a tourney "It's all nit picking" If they say it's a foul I put one up. If I say that's a foul and they don't think so I say never mind.
Rod.
P.S. A couple or three never minds and we don't play again.
 

onepocket926

Verified Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Messages
744
P.S. A couple or three never minds and we don't play again.
.....right-a-mundo....a lot of problems occur when....You stay to long at the Party.....

.....I don't have much sympathy when someone tells Me....they've been at the same boring ass job for 30 years and hate it...or...they've been married to someone they can't stand for 10 years......when is the time to shit or get off the pot?....

......if Your opponent is a Nit.....leave Him/Her to play with their self...
 

darmoose

Verified Member
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
1,611
The way I read it, you have done the most careful reading and interpretation of the 1p.org cue ball fouls only rule.

Thanks
John,

Thank you. I appreciate that somebody would do the research to understand what I have said on this subject. It should never have morphed into the controversy it did in the first place.

Preacher Ron's question was a simple and straightforward one, and was answered correctly in the very first response by Tom Wirth. But as frequently happens, because opinions are like bungholes, everybody has one, and feels they need to show it, we get these overblown clusterfluks that go on til Duckie just can't take it no more.

Actually, GPDoc was sorta right about one thing, I don't mind a good debate. I kinda find it stimulating (exercise for the mind), like a good "Chicago squeeze style" one pocket game.
Unfortunately, going up against the establishment here can get a little stickey. They tend to circle the wagons and get uber defensive, especially if you don't have 4 or 5 thousand posts recorded, go figer.

But, as Artie says, I don't go in hoping to get lucky, I got the nuts.

Now, we have Dr Bill, whom I very much respect, agreeing but wanting to dismiss the rule except in refereed matches, for convenience sake I guess.

Bill, the entirety of WPA 20 "Cue ball fouls only" is written for only non-refereed matches and clearly says so. The intention being that in refereed matches that all touch fouls apply. Your suggestion would just be "jury nullification" wouldn't it? Maybe we should ignore double hitting the cue ball, after all, you do have to see it. Apparently, we would never expect anyone to call a foul on themselves.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

One final word to all those who don't think touching a second ball is a foul. And maybe, like Artie, I could make some money on this if anyone cares to bet, ponder this:

WPA 20 is the controlling rule as far as 1P.org is concerned, and it also says it is a foul to touch even ONE object ball during the act of shooting punishable by ball in hand to the opposing player.

Anybody wanna bet?:D:D
 

onepocket926

Verified Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Messages
744
John,

Thank you. I appreciate that somebody would do the research to understand what I have said on this subject. It should never have morphed into the controversy it did in the first place.

Preacher Ron's question was a simple and straightforward one, and was answered correctly in the very first response by Tom Wirth. But as frequently happens, because opinions are like bungholes, everybody has one, and feels they need to show it, we get these overblown clusterfluks that go on til Duckie just can't take it no more.

Actually, GPDoc was sorta right about one thing, I don't mind a good debate. I kinda find it stimulating (exercise for the mind), like a good "Chicago squeeze style" one pocket game.
Unfortunately, going up against the establishment here can get a little stickey. They tend to circle the wagons and get uber defensive, especially if you don't have 4 or 5 thousand posts recorded, go figer.

But, as Artie says, I don't go in hoping to get lucky, I got the nuts.

Now, we have Dr Bill, whom I very much respect, agreeing but wanting to dismiss the rule except in refereed matches, for convenience sake I guess.

Bill, the entirety of WPA 20 "Cue ball fouls only" is written for only non-refereed matches and clearly says so. The intention being that in refereed matches that all touch fouls apply. Your suggestion would just be "jury nullification" wouldn't it? Maybe we should ignore double hitting the cue ball, after all, you do have to see it. Apparently, we would never expect anyone to call a foul on themselves.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

One final word to all those who don't think touching a second ball is a foul. And maybe, like Artie, I could make some money on this if anyone cares to bet, ponder this:

WPA 20 is the controlling rule as far as 1P.org is concerned, and it also says it is a foul to touch even ONE object ball during the act of shooting punishable by ball in hand to the opposing player.


Anybody wanna bet?:D:D
.....I will bet Ya....that Your last post....makes about.....A couple or three never minds.......

......You win.....I'm gettin' tired of talkin' to....bungholes :frus too....it's hard damn work......

.....but, please remind Me to call the REF....over to view all Your shots if We ever play :)....that way I can sit back and watch the match on Youtube without distractions......:D:D:D
 

wincardona

Verified Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
7,294
John,

Thank you. I appreciate that somebody would do the research to understand what I have said on this subject. It should never have morphed into the controversy it did in the first place.

Preacher Ron's question was a simple and straightforward one, and was answered correctly in the very first response by Tom Wirth. But as frequently happens, because opinions are like bungholes, everybody has one, and feels they need to show it, we get these overblown clusterfluks that go on til Duckie just can't take it no more.

Actually, GPDoc was sorta right about one thing, I don't mind a good debate. I kinda find it stimulating (exercise for the mind), like a good "Chicago squeeze style" one pocket game.
Unfortunately, going up against the establishment here can get a little stickey. They tend to circle the wagons and get uber defensive, especially if you don't have 4 or 5 thousand posts recorded, go figer.

But, as Artie says, I don't go in hoping to get lucky, I got the nuts.

Now, we have Dr Bill, whom I very much respect, agreeing but wanting to dismiss the rule except in refereed matches, for convenience sake I guess.

Bill, the entirety of WPA 20 "Cue ball fouls only" is written for only non-refereed matches and clearly says so. The intention being that in refereed matches that all touch fouls apply. Your suggestion would just be "jury nullification" wouldn't it? Maybe we should ignore double hitting the cue ball, after all, you do have to see it. Apparently, we would never expect anyone to call a foul on themselves.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

One final word to all those who don't think touching a second ball is a foul. And maybe, like Artie, I could make some money on this if anyone cares to bet, ponder this:

WPA 20 is the controlling rule as far as 1P.org is concerned, and it also says it is a foul to touch even ONE object ball during the act of shooting punishable by ball in hand to the opposing player.

Anybody wanna bet?:D:D
My bad, you're correct about all refereed matches are played by the.. all touched fouls apply rule..However, it always wasn't that way. Maybe I should of said that in "tournament play" all rules should be enforced to protect the integrity of the rule, which would then preserve the integrity of the game. Any ways the debate is actually based off of "side action" play, or match play, between players that are monitoring their own game. With this understanding I believe that discretionary rules should be discussed before hand and revised in some way to create a more manageable situation if it happened to have showed. Just my opinion.

Old schoolers had to learn to "roll with the punches" in order to succeed, unlike today where every thing is measured. Keeping the edge on the side of the savvier ones.:D :sorry

Bill Incardona
 

Tom Wirth

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
2,602
I'd like to make one last point on this subject.

I learned a valuable lesson early on in my pool career. I was playing this guy some One Pocket for $50. and had way the best of it. I was up four or five games when he committed a foul by moving a couple balls with his hand while jacked up over them. I called a foul on the guy and he got pissed off about it and quit after a small discussion. I had insisted on the foul. It was stupid of me.

Never again did I make the same mistake. For the cost of one ball I alienated this guy and lost a good customer. When playing in a cash game discretion must be used in calling fouls. Obviously you can't let them get away with everything but there will be situations where common sense trumps the rules.

Tom
 
Top