Legal or not 2.0

darmoose

Verified Member
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
2,420
From
Baltimore, MD
The shot that comes up quite often and bugs the hell out of me is this. The CB is 1/8" to 1/4" from the object ball, the shooter jacks up so that his stick is almost vertical and hits straight down on the back of the CB. How do I judge if he made a "good" hit on the CB?

Here's how I judge it. I try to stand off to the side od the direction he is shooting and watch whether the CB ball travels forward past the point where the CB makes contact with the object ball, if it does IT IS A FOUL. There is no physical way you can make the CB travel past this point without "pushing it forward with a bad (double hit).:sorry

It is amazing how many seasoned pool players won't accept this fact. Are there any of you reading this? Share your logic if you care to.:rolleyes::rolleyes:
 

jtompilot

Verified Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
5,797
From
New Orleans
The shot that comes up quite often and bugs the hell out of me is this. The CB is 1/8" to 1/4" from the object ball, the shooter jacks up so that his stick is almost vertical and hits straight down on the back of the CB. How do I judge if he made a "good" hit on the CB?

Here's how I judge it. I try to stand off to the side od the direction he is shooting and watch whether the CB ball travels forward past the point where the CB makes contact with the object ball, if it does IT IS A FOUL. There is no physical way you can make the CB travel past this point without "pushing it forward with a bad (double hit).:sorry

It is amazing how many seasoned pool players won't accept this fact. Are there any of you reading this? Share your logic if you care to.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

That's a very good point. However Derby City Rules basically allow that type of foul as long as the cue stick is elevated at least 45 degrees. So I think the pros and others have adopted that type of rule.
 

petie

Verified Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
3,314
From
Citrus Springs, FL
Years ago when I first began playing pool, it was fully legal to shoot with a level cue through the balls as long as it was "one continuous stroke." There might have been a limit on the distance between them but I was not aware of it. I understand that in 3 cushion, you had to shoot away from the ball. When pool leagues started, all of a sudden a tremendous number of basement players came rushing into the game and brought with them a lot of knitty rules and calls. One Pocket may be a lot of things but knitty has never been one of them.
 

Mkbtank

Verified Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
5,901
From
Philly Pa
Legal or not 2.0

That's a very good point. However Derby City Rules basically allow that type of foul as long as the cue stick is elevated at least 45 degrees. So I think the pros and others have adopted that type of rule.



They sure do. I call this, the "Dechaine Rule". I've said this before but in short.. We were in s match at the Derby. He insisted on getting a ref. I made this hit which looked bad to me and was about to say so, when the ref said forcefully "Good Hit!" The ref said because I was jacked up to 45 degrees, it had to be good. Dechaine's head was going to explode heh. Seemed like bullsh$&t to me but MD was not nice at all, and insisted on the ref, so I just let it go. In other circumstances, I agree with you and if the ball goes forward, I generally either call or take the foul.
 

cincy_kid

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2015
Messages
7,794
From
Cincinnati, OH
I am with Jim on this one..if the cue is elevated 45 or higher, even if the ball moves forward, it's a good hit.

Also on Petie's post, did this change? When I used to play every day, if the CB was frozen to the object ball, you could have your cue level and push through the ball and it's a good hit because there's no "double hit" occurring since it's frozen to the object ball. Is that still the case?
 

youngstown

Verified Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
1,748
Legal or not 2.0

If the cue ball jumps at all it's possible it's not a foul...other than that I agree


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

gulfportdoc

Verified Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2004
Messages
12,654
From
Gulfport, Mississippi
That's a very good point. However Derby City Rules basically allow that type of foul as long as the cue stick is elevated at least 45 degrees. So I think the pros and others have adopted that type of rule.
Yeah, the DCC states it this way:

Double Hits, Push Shots, Miscues: Object balls frozen to the cue ball or very close to the cue ball require you to elevate the cue approximately 45 degrees to stroke the shot. This will be considered a legal shot even though a double hit may occur. ...

The WPA sticks to the classic definition:

6.7 Double Hit / Frozen Balls
If the cue stick contacts the cue ball more than once on a shot, the shot is a foul. If the cue ball is close to but not touching an object ball and the cue tip is still on the cue ball when the cue ball contacts that object ball, the shot is a foul.
...

However the WPA uses professional referees in large international events. So their refs are understood to be near-flawless judges of double hits.;)

In actual fact it's extremely difficult to judge certain double hits without the aid of super slo-mo video replay. So to simply things; to avoid arguments; and to make it easier on referees, the DCC has compromised by saying as long as the shooter elevates at least 45 degrees, then the shot will have been considered legal. As a practical matter, it's probably a good adoption.

~Doc
 

Island Drive

Verified Member
Joined
May 1, 2011
Messages
5,192
From
florence, colorado
One things for sure, to make the call I need to see it live....period. No verbalizing of any shot can be the same as seeing it happen in real time. Every cue is swung different by every player, especially when going vertical.
 

Disco Dave

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
817
From
Houston, TX
someone called a foul on me the other day for a push or double hit, I don't know which, but the situation was that the CB and OB were very close to each other (not frozen) and after my hit, the CB raced after the OB almost as fast on the same path. I did not push or double hit, yet my opponent claimed that there was no way the CB could have travelled that fast without it being a foul.

I dont believe I miscued, pushed or double hit and I have a big problem with a person claiming the foul based on his opinion of the resulting cue ball path instead of from seeing the stroke, our hearing the hit, (there was no sound of a double hit, nor did I feel one). By the way, I used top and my stroke rose off the top of the CB
 

Jeff sparks

Verified Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2015
Messages
3,317
From
Houston, Texas
someone called a foul on me the other day for a push or double hit, I don't know which, but the situation was that the CB and OB were very close to each other (not frozen) and after my hit, the CB raced after the OB almost as fast on the same path. I did not push or double hit, yet my opponent claimed that there was no way the CB could have travelled that fast without it being a foul.

I dont believe I miscued, pushed or double hit and I have a big problem with a person claiming the foul based on his opinion of the resulting cue ball path instead of from seeing the stroke, our hearing the hit, (there was no sound of a double hit, nor did I feel one). By the way, I used top and my stroke rose off the top of the CB

The OB went three rails and so did the CB, lol and the distance they were apart throughout the entire shot indicated that the cue tip hit the CB then the CB hit the OB driving it forward rapidly, then the follow through hit the CB again driving it forward right behind the OB. Lol, it looked like a match race between two horses the way they raced around the table... Sorry Dave, following the CB at that rate ain't possible, it had to be struck again with the cue tip after it contacted the OB. Ask your friend and teacher Sylver, he will tell you the truth and if he tells you you're right, well----- he's just working the room....:):):)
 

Disco Dave

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
817
From
Houston, TX
The OB went three rails and so did the CB, lol and the distance they were apart throughout the entire shot indicated that the cue tip hit the CB then the CB hit the OB driving it forward rapidly, then the follow through hit the CB again driving it forward right behind the OB. Lol, it looked like a match race between two horses the way they raced around the table... Sorry Dave, following the CB at that rate ain't possible, it had to be struck again with the cue tip after it contacted the OB. Ask your friend and teacher Sylver, he will tell you the truth and if he tells you you're right, well----- he's just working the room....:):):)

I don't buy that it HAD to be a double hit for the CB to act that way. I need more than your assetion that "it just aint possible".
 

darmoose

Verified Member
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
2,420
From
Baltimore, MD
I am with Jim on this one..if the cue is elevated 45 or higher, even if the ball moves forward, it's a good hit.

Also on Petie's post, did this change? When I used to play every day, if the CB was frozen to the object ball, you could have your cue level and push through the ball and it's a good hit because there's no "double hit" occurring since it's frozen to the object ball. Is that still the case?

Kid,

Jim did not say it was a good hit. He said it was an allowable foul. These attempts at writing a rule for this situation are nothing more than appeasement of those that think they are entitled to shoot in a certain direction no matter what.:sorry They then look at you like you are stupid, cause you don't understand that they would never make a bad hit.

Whether you make a rule that you must jack up 45 degrees, or shoot in one continuous stroke you are deliberately allowing fouls, or at the very least fostering situations that require judgement and lead to arguments.:frus

You are not entitled to shoot in any direction you want to without regard for the situation. I think the only rule that makes sense in this situation whether the CB is very close to or frozen to the object ball is this.

"In order to avoid the possibility for a double hit when the CB is close to or frozen on an object ball, you must shoot away from the object ball at such an angle that the cue stick if extended forward through the CB would not come into contact with the object ball."

This rule eliminates any double hit, and more importantly, is reviewable by all players BEFORE the shot.

Any opinions on this rule?
 

Jeff sparks

Verified Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2015
Messages
3,317
From
Houston, Texas
Kid,

Jim did not say it was a good hit. He said it was an allowable foul. These attempts at writing a rule for this situation are nothing more than appeasement of those that think they are entitled to shoot in a certain direction no matter what.:sorry They then look at you like you are stupid, cause you don't understand that they would never make a bad hit.

Whether you make a rule that you must jack up 45 degrees, or shoot in one continuous stroke you are deliberately allowing fouls, or at the very least fostering situations that require judgement and lead to arguments.:frus

You are not entitled to shoot in any direction you want to without regard for the situation. I think the only rule that makes sense in this situation whether the CB is very close to or frozen to the object ball is this.

"In order to avoid the possibility for a double hit when the CB is close to or frozen on an object ball, you must shoot away from the object ball at such an angle that the cue stick if extended forward through the CB would not come into contact with the object ball."

This rule eliminates any double hit, and more importantly, is reviewable by all players BEFORE the shot.

Any opinions on this rule?

I like this much better than allowing a person to shoot a shot where the result will obviously be a foul...then calling it "Good Hit". The reasoning behind shooting away from the ball applies equally to all players and would work, unfortunately for ease of operation other rules have been adopted... Less conflict and any ref can judge 45degree elevation...
 

darmoose

Verified Member
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
2,420
From
Baltimore, MD
I don't buy that it HAD to be a double hit for the CB to act that way. I need more than your assetion that "it just aint possible".

Dave,

With all due respect, yours is a perfect example of the problem I am describing in my earlier post. You either don't recognize laws of physics or don't understand them or just simply think you are infallible.( I doubt the latter):sorry

There is no better evidence of whether or not you committed a foul than the action and travel of the CB, except perhaps slow motion video.

I assure you given your scenario as described, no one has to have witnessed the shot to know that a foul was committed.:lol
 

darmoose

Verified Member
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
2,420
From
Baltimore, MD
I like this much better than allowing a person to shoot a shot where the result will obviously be a foul...then calling it "Good Hit". The reasoning behind shooting away from the ball applies equally to all players and would work, unfortunately for ease of operation other rules have been adopted... Less conflict and any ref can judge 45degree elevation...

Jeff,

While you are right about this rule being better than current rules that allow fouls to be committed, I must take issue with your assertion that current rules are easier to manage in real time.

My proposed rule does not allow a foul to be committed (except perhaps a miscue), and the shot can be judged for compliance prior to the shot by merely sighting down the line of the cue stick. The logic of this is supported by the fact that the CB is 2 1/4" diameter, so if your aiming angle is away from the object ball enough, and you are hitting the CB approximately in the center, your stick cannot hit the object ball ( well, except maybe unless you have a stroke like Mitch':lol:lols).
 

Mkbtank

Verified Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2013
Messages
5,901
From
Philly Pa
Legal or not 2.0

Jeff,


( well, except maybe unless you have a stroke like Mitch':lol:lols).



All that typing and that's the first intelligent thing you've said In a month. 😳


Also.. Dave... That sounds like it was definitely a foul. Common when two balls are that close and you hit the cue twice. Even if you didn't feel it. Sorry Disco.
 

cincy_kid

Verified Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2015
Messages
7,794
From
Cincinnati, OH
Kid,

Jim did not say it was a good hit. He said it was an allowable foul. These attempts at writing a rule for this situation are nothing more than appeasement of those that think they are entitled to shoot in a certain direction no matter what.:sorry They then look at you like you are stupid, cause you don't understand that they would never make a bad hit.

Whether you make a rule that you must jack up 45 degrees, or shoot in one continuous stroke you are deliberately allowing fouls, or at the very least fostering situations that require judgement and lead to arguments.:frus

You are not entitled to shoot in any direction you want to without regard for the situation. I think the only rule that makes sense in this situation whether the CB is very close to or frozen to the object ball is this.

"In order to avoid the possibility for a double hit when the CB is close to or frozen on an object ball, you must shoot away from the object ball at such an angle that the cue stick if extended forward through the CB would not come into contact with the object ball."

This rule eliminates any double hit, and more importantly, is reviewable by all players BEFORE the shot.

Any opinions on this rule?

The problem I have with your rule is that would mean all you have to do is get the CB close to an OB and now your opponent is forced to shoot away from the ball. Its a new way for you to play safeties, just get the balls close to each other.

I like the adopted rule of 45 degree angle better because although you are right that most are probably going to be true fouls anyways when you are that close to your work, it eliminates more arguments on whether it was a good hit or not.

I don't know, I am not an expert, these are just my opinions :)
 
Top