Rules verification

BOX

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Messages
21
I need a little help I've seen this happen many times and handle many different ways I was watching the West Coast swing the year 17 Shane playing tony a race to ten for ten and about 2 hours 15 minutes in part 1 shane has 5balls and tony scratch, he has no balls to pay,all 10 balls are behind the head string Shane has ball in hand,he kicks at a ball behind the head string,now I've seen a ball spotted for a legal shot and I've seen a kick what's the ruling thanks in advance
 
Last edited:

catkins

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2016
Messages
559
I have alwasy heard yo uspot the ball closest to the head string
 

12squared

Verified Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2005
Messages
1,653
Per the Oficial Rules on onepocket.org - "The Game" "Official One Pocket Rules" "9, Spotting Balls", Chris is correct:

9.5 In the event of a scratch with the offending player having no balls to spot when all of the balls are located behind the head string, the ball nearest the head string may be spotted at the request of the incoming player. If two or more balls are equally close to the head string, the highest numbered ball would be spotted.

Dave
 

BOX

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Messages
21
I thought the same thing but Shane kick at the ball West coast swing 1710 for 10
 

cincy_kid

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2015
Messages
4,605
I thought the same thing but Shane kick at the ball West coast swing 1710 for 10
Personally, it has never come up for me over the years, so I don't think it happens that often at all.

If so, it may have to be one of those things you decide pre-match with your opponent to add to the list...

we playing rerack? whole ball or half? 2 or more balls moved is a foul? etc etc etc....
 

Bob Jewett

Verified Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
106
The general rule for spotting a ball when all balls are behind the line changed a while ago so that if two balls are equidistant -- a very unlikely occurrence -- the player gets to choose. This is so the rule works for ball sets that are not numbered.

I think I have never seen two balls equidistant when one needed to be spotted. I can't recall ever seeing a kitchen ball spotted at one pocket, but it could happen at any spot (or none) if you start an up-table game early. I don't play those people.:)
 

BOX

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Messages
21
For me the rules protect the integrity of the sport helps maintain credibility for your ending to continue you must pocket a ball it does not say except for the break questionable. Full ball in or out ok. Touch two balls you owe a ball ok,I play all balls foul thanks for everybody's response
 

Tobermory

Verified Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2017
Messages
608
Nice to see you dipping into the dark arts of one pocket, Bob. I hope you'll be weighing in on the many 1p rules vagaries and uncertainties that often come up here. It'll be nice to have a grownup in the room. And we Berkeleyites need to stick together!

So what's wrong with a little old school up table 1p?

See you at Crown.


The general rule for spotting a ball when all balls are behind the line changed a while ago so that if two balls are equidistant -- a very unlikely occurrence -- the player gets to choose. This is so the rule works for ball sets that are not numbered.

I think I have never seen two balls equidistant when one needed to be spotted. I can't recall ever seeing a kitchen ball spotted at one pocket, but it could happen at any spot (or none) if you start an up-table game early. I don't play those people.:)
 

Dennis "Whitey" Young

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2017
Messages
1,350
Bob Jewett would you comment on this, for I know at one time you were on the rule committee for BCA.

At one time, actually during my playing era, the lowest numbered ball would spot if they were equal distance behind the line. This makes perfect sense in staying consistent and avoiding confusion, for in Rotation Games the lowest number ball always spots, and if two balls spot the lowest numbered ball spots first.
Someone with their infamous wisdom over the years that was in power to do so, changed it to highest ball spots, even though it makes absolutely no sense. Now as you stated some billiard authorities have players choice.

Next, it was highly debated that it use to be when spotting a ball it would be spotted frozen to all balls including the cue ball. I site my '68 BCA rule book, and this is of course how I played the games during my playing years, '69 - '73. I actually had to post a picture of the '68 BCA spotting rule to prove that the official bca rule was to spot the ball frozen to the cue ball.

Spotting the balls frozen to the cue ball, and I think you will agree, gives so many more options than leaving a gap! For a ball frozen to the cue ball allows the shooter to shoot through the object ball, whereas if there is a gap then of course you are susceptible to a double hit, and have few options. Thus actually penalizing the non-fouling incoming player, and supporting the player that committed the foul.

Jerry Matchin sited a match where Efren purposely fouled to spot a ball to block the cue ball, thus trapping the opponent, whereas if our historical decades old rule of spotting the ball frozen to the cue ball was in play then the opposing player could of escaped! Which I sited and this started the heated debate.

So once again over the years this decades upon decades old BCA rule was changed though someone's infamous reasoning who was in power. BCA changed presidents over the years like we change shirts.

Some thought it would be a foul to spot the object ball frozen to the cue ball because it is contacted, but it is not a foul in accordance to our OP.org spotting rules. But, back in those long gone days we officially played all ball fouls, which means if this was true then just spotting a ball frozen to an object ball would then also be a foul, which it is not, and thus would not be with the cue ball, for the spotting rule supersedes the 'all ball foul' rule.

So I of course support the adoption of our American historical way we use to spot balls, and of course this is the way OP was played in its historical beginning, which had its guidelines following the 14.1 & General BCA rules. It is also fairer to the incoming non-fouling opponent!

I would like to see commonsense prevail and have OP.org adopt this spotting rule. Dr. Bill agreed with me that it does make commonsense, and he also had issue with leaving a gap, for the gap is non specific as to how much gap, and could result in argument and judgement.

Your thoughts! thanks, Whitey

We are losing our historical American rules, and I can site more!
 
Last edited:

bobt64

Verified Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2015
Messages
202
I noticed that also, thought a ball needed to be spotted and was surprised when Shane shot the kick. Do you think both forfot the rule?

Also I haven't found part 3, thought it was up but nothing the last time I looked.
 

Bob Jewett

Verified Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
106
... At one time, actually during my playing era, the lowest numbered ball would spot if they were equal distance behind the line. This makes perfect sense in staying consistent and avoiding confusion, for in Rotation Games the lowest number ball always spots, and if two balls spot the lowest numbered ball spots first. ...

Next, it was highly debated that it use to be when spotting a ball it would be spotted frozen to all balls including the cue ball. I site my '68 BCA rule book, and this is of course how I played the games during my playing years, '69 - '73. I actually had to post a picture of the '68 BCA spotting rule to prove that the official bca rule was to spot the ball frozen to the cue ball....
For the first point, the only ball that might be spotted because it was behind the line at rotation is the lowest numbered ball and that is without reference to whether it is the closest to the line or not. I think it is nice to be be consistent, but in this case you have a problem for "casino" sets (reds and yellows) for eight ball. Also, if a ball was to be spotted from the kitchen in rotation, you could be certain that the cue ball would not interfere with its placement.

For the second, in the 1968 rule book, the rule for spotting balls is not even in the section for 14.1, it is in the section for rotation. It had been there since the 1945 rule book (for the BAA which became the BCA). The rule said that the object ball should be frozen if the cue ball was interfering with placement on the line. The rule was worded much differently in the rules from the 1920s but was essentially the same: freeze the ball.

The rule changed in the 1970 rule book to "close but not frozen" but it was still in the section on rotation. On the rules committee for that revision were Willie Mosconi, Irving Crane, Jimmy Caras and Joe Balsis. They may or may not have been involved with the rule change -- sometimes the committee members had no control over what was printed. So, the "don't freeze" rule has been in effect for 50 years.

I have not checked all the rule books since 1970, but the current rules do not freeze the spotted object ball to the cue ball -- only to other object balls. (At snooker a spotted ball is never frozen to anything.)
 

Dennis "Whitey" Young

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2017
Messages
1,350
Thanks for the reply Bob!
There is always an on going endeavor to get clarification of what rules the initial Johnston City OP tournament went by. We know they used the official bca rules of 14.1 as a general rule guide line, of which they would of spotted the ball frozen to the cb. So this spotting rule is at the roots of OP.

It is good to know when the spotting rule changed, 1970. One would have to wonder if there was a change in presidency of BCA, for it is the same rule committee pretty much, as in '68, and they had been playing straight pool by the same spotting rule for decades prior. Any knowledgeable pool player, let alone these HOF'ers, would obviously know it is much better having a ball frozen to the cb than not when trying to maneuver using that ob.

Thanks for your historical knowledge, it is very much welcomed, and needed to learn the roots of the game of OP. The 1970 rule change sure explains why most all members thought that the ob was never frozen to the cb when spotting. Thanks so much! Whitey

real games spot balls w/ BIH-BTL.
 

baby huey

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
1,333
I have not seen this situation come up in a really long time. I think the 14.1 rule might apply here in One Pocket and that is the ball closest to the kitchen line spots? But I'm not so sure so Bob Jewett might chime in here. And, maybe we need to rethink the rules some in that these rules applied to spotting all balls which mostly comes up in nine ball. Recently in BCA, if you scratched on the break in eight ball you had to shoot a ball out of the Kitchen. I think that changed but I'm not sure. In 14.1 for example if the balls are behind the Kitchen line and you are frozen up somewhere with the rack somewhat in tact, why wouldn't a player just shoot the cueball into the hole since those balls in the Kitchen are not playable on a scratch?
 

Bob Jewett

Verified Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
106
I have not seen this situation come up in a really long time. I think the 14.1 rule might apply here in One Pocket and that is the ball closest to the kitchen line spots? But I'm not so sure so Bob Jewett might chime in here. And, maybe we need to rethink the rules some in that these rules applied to spotting all balls which mostly comes up in nine ball. Recently in BCA, if you scratched on the break in eight ball you had to shoot a ball out of the Kitchen. I think that changed but I'm not sure. In 14.1 for example if the balls are behind the Kitchen line and you are frozen up somewhere with the rack somewhat in tact, why wouldn't a player just shoot the cueball into the hole since those balls in the Kitchen are not playable on a scratch?
It's a little away from 1P, but....

The standard rule for pool when all legal targets are behind the line and the cue ball is in hand behind the line is that the legal target ball nearest the line spots at the shooter's request. In the case of equidistant legal targets, the shooter chooses, but this is a rule that exists for completeness and may never have been used in a game.

The BCAPL rule at eight ball recently changed and a scratch on the break gives up ball in hand anywhere. (The BCA is a different organization and goes by the WPA rule which is in the kitchen.)

At 14.1 when your opponent scratches and all the loose balls are behind the line and the rack is still mostly solid, it is a standard play to scratch into a side pocket and force your opponent to play from ball in hand. A common example is when a player misses the break shot and scratches and leaves the break ball in the kitchen. When he is forced to shoot from the kitchen after your scratch, the standard play is to take a second foul to the back of the rack with a soft, but not too soft, shot.
 

El Chapo

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2016
Messages
1,562
Per the Oficial Rules on onepocket.org - "The Game" "Official One Pocket Rules" "9, Spotting Balls", Chris is correct:

9.5 In the event of a scratch with the offending player having no balls to spot when all of the balls are located behind the head string, the ball nearest the head string may be spotted at the request of the incoming player. If two or more balls are equally close to the head string, the highest numbered ball would be spotted.

Dave
They should change that to shooter's choice of ball gets spotted. Anyway i have never even seen this come up myself.
 

BOX

Verified Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Messages
21
Relayed it to the rules Just a though

Relayed it to the rules Just a though

The break in one pocket is under attack to some rightfully so if you make a ball on the break there's a rerack, OK what about this instead of a re-rack what about changing the location of the rack The same thing happened to Corey in nine ball so let's try this the fifth ball in the reck center ball or the eight ball on the spot! What do you think. It would change the opening break a lot thanks for reading in advance
 

beatle

Verified Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
2,179
never change rules so that the best player gets the best of it. hurts the game. the best players win all the time already.

you make a ball on the break keep shooting tough luck for your opponent.
gives the option to play a more aggressive break. but if you make it a re-rake then a more safe break prevails. which keeps the balls closed and favors the better player.
rack your own favors the better player who practices his break and knows the perfect rack for it and he gets to set it up.
 

beatle

Verified Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
2,179
without a referee you cant have all balls foul. leaves it too easy for one to call a foul that didnt happen. ive never seen all ball fouls where there wasnt a ref present. they only did it anyway in 14.1 tournaments with a ref.
 
Top