Is this a legal stroke???

[lll]

i know this has been discussed but i couldnt find it with a search and i forgot the answer.....
...
you place the tip of the cue on the felt under the edge of the cue ball and pick the shaft up so the tip hits the cue ball
...
this could be to take an intentional when you dont want to move the cue ball much
or you want the cue ball and object ball (frozen or not) to move in a straight line and avoid the queston on whether it was a push

i beleive rod stated he uses this stroke sometimes (icbw)
with todays rules (ie you cant hit the cue ball with your ferrule anymore to take an intentional)
is the stroke i described legal???

 

[NH Steve]

i know this has been discussed but i couldnt find it with a search and i forgot the answer.....
...
you place the tip of the cue on the felt under the edge of the cue ball and pick the shaft up so the tip hits the cue ball
...
this could be to take an intentional when you dont want to move the cue ball much
or you want the cue ball and object ball (frozen or not) to move in a straight line and avoid the queston on whether it was a push

i beleive rod stated he uses this stroke sometimes (icbw)
with todays rules (ie you cant hit the cue ball with your ferrule anymore to take an intentional)
is the stroke i described legal???

That's the kind of thing that would fall under the umbrella of general rules regarding a legal stroke, in my opinion, i.e. not something specific to One Pocket. The question I would ask though, has to do with the fact that you only picked up the stick, there was no "forward motion" of the cue stick. I think that might make it illegal by the general rules in some TD eyes. To keep it legal, I think the shooter would have to get a little forward motion in the cue. Just a little

 

[jtompilot]

No, it's not legal.

It was a popular stroke about 10 or 15 years ago. I'm not sure if the rules were changed around then to cover this stroke.

 

[Frank Almanza]

I think that would be scooping the ball which is illegal.

 

[lll]

I think that would be scooping the ball which is illegal.

frank
you are not scooping because you are not going underneath the cue ball and lifting it
think of hitting a topsin forehand in tennis
you are brushing up the cue ball

 

[androd]

I remember posting a diagram of the shot. Most all said it's illegal. Seems fine to me, I wouldn't complain if someone shot it on me.
Rod.

 

[lll]

I remember posting a diagram of the shot. Most all said it's illegal. Seems fine to me, I wouldn't complain if someone shot it on me.
Rod.

i remember that rod but couldnt find it or remember the concensus of opinion
thanks for posting

 

[Jimmy B]

I remember posting a diagram of the shot. Most all said it's illegal. Seems fine to me, I wouldn't complain if someone shot it on me.
Rod.

I always considered the shot perfectly legal, as long as they hit it with the tip one time coming up. No problem from me either...

 

[androd]

I always considered the shot perfectly legal, as long as they hit it with the tip one time coming up. No problem from me either...

Yeah, you're striking the middle of the CB with the tip. So far they haven't made a rule about how you may hold the stick. (I don't think)
Rod.
P.S. No new rule would surprise me tho.

 

[jtompilot]

Yeah, you're striking the middle of the CB with the tip. So far they haven't made a rule about how you may hold the stick. (I don't think)
Rod.
P.S. No new rule would surprise me tho.

BCA rule 6.6 touching the balls. The QB must be struck with a forward motion of the cue.

That stroke doesn't use a forward motion.

 

[jtompilot]

This also reminds me of guys lining up a shot with their stick by laying it on the table and stepping back to look at the shot. I've asked a lot of players if they have ever looked at a rule book. All I get is a deer in the head light look.

 

[androd]

This also reminds me of guys lining up a shot with their stick by laying it on the table and stepping back to look at the shot. I've asked a lot of players if they have ever looked at a rule book. All I get is a deer in the head light look.

Another stupid rule.

 

[jtompilot]

Another stupid rule.

I agree. But what is stupid to some are good for others. Just like jump sticks, why is there a minimum length. I got pretty good with just using the shaft, then someone made a rule against it.

 

[lll]

BCA rule 6.6 touching the balls. The QB must be struck with a forward motion of the cue.

That stroke doesn't use a forward motion.

thanks for the rule

 

[tylerdurden]

I have seen guys do this in frustrated haste, and that is the type of thing I welcome.

 

[gulfportdoc]

Yeah, the "forward motion" distinction is pretty universal now. However it makes one wonder about shots such as the full masse, or the jump shot. In either of those shots the cue stick itself is not moving "forward". However the cue ball is. But if the defining characteristic of a legal shot is simply "forward stroking" (the phrase the WPA uses), then the masse and certain jumps shots ought to be considered illegal by that definition.

If, on the other hand, the defining characteristic is forward motion of the cue ball, then the lifting of the cue and brushing the CB ought to be legal.

I think that Grady was a proponent of that technique on one of his tapes.

Doc

 

[tylerdurden]

We have really weird rules in pool. This causes confusion. The other problem is, people don't know or refuse to acknowledge we have bad rules. I have stated this stuff before, but I really dont think it would be that hard to come up with some great rules. People would hate it for a while, but at least the rules would be good.

Let's exemplify.....

Is it legal to knock the cueball into an object ball with the side of your shaft? Always gets a "no" answer. Why then are certain miscues when the cb surely hits the shaft not called fouls. One answer: bad, inconsistent rules. The problem is things become ingrained. We can't imagine changing. Look at the frozen ball rule (or lack thereof a coherent, consistent one), my god. The examples could continue...

 

[WhatWouldWojoDo]

So the shot would still be legal if there was a minor forward motion at the same time?

So when lifting the cue up if you move forward any small movement it would technically be forward motion? Would that make it legal?

 

[androd]

So the shot would still be legal if there was a minor forward motion at the same time?

So when lifting the cue up if you move forward any small movement it would technically be forward motion? Would that make it legal?

It should but won't. :frus
Rod.

 

[jtompilot]

Yeah, the "forward motion" distinction is pretty universal now. However it makes one wonder about shots such as the full masse, or the jump shot. In either of those shots the cue stick itself is not moving "forward". However the cue ball is. But if the defining characteristic of a legal shot is simply "forward stroking" (the phrase the WPA uses), then the masse and certain jumps shots ought to be considered illegal by that definition.

If, on the other hand, the defining characteristic is forward motion of the cue ball, then the lifting of the cue and brushing the CB ought to be legal.

I think that Grady was a proponent of that technique on one of his tapes.

Doc

Doc, of the cue is moving forward on a masse. Look at it from the perspective of the entire cue from buttcap to tip. If the cue is pointed straight down it's still a forward motion, raising the tip isn't.