Safety Play on a Frozen Object Ball

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

A three shot limit — or make it two like the three foul rule and must warn if on two — but a third would be considered a foul; that might work instead of worrying about whether a ball is frozen or not.

thinking out of the box again. ...

Steve to piggy back off of your comment: I believe their are a lot of members that do not know about the 'frozen ob 3 shot rule', for it is little known outside of the 14.1 world, and currently the rule has been dropped by those with tinny minds that are in power, and now it is all but lost to history. I'll briefly explain;

When the ob is frozen to the rail and the shooter shoots and either touches it or not but does leave the cb in front of the ob without the cb contacting a rail, it is a foul (IMO a chicken shit play). Thereafter if the players continue to tap the ob, and if it stays within 1" of the rail the rule still applies whether a legal shot occurs or not. On the third tap shot (by the chicken shit shooter who initiated this fiasco) the rule requires that either the ob contacts another rail or the cb contacts a rail. Then if this legal shot is not accomplished it goes into the 14.1 penalty phase.
The penalty IMO for OP would be an option to have BIH-BTL. To Steve's point, yes you would declare the player is on their 3rd shot before their shot.

I witnessed a Skylar match in which his lesser skilled opponent initiated rolling up on a ball and the tapping began for about 10 minutes on the side rail past the side pocket, it eventually crossed the side pocket and Skylar hooked him behind another ball on the end rail, and the opponent kicked at a the same ball on the side rail and slightly caught the rail first, thus no rail, and Skylar called a foul in which the player did not except., and Skylar let it go. What a fiasco, and sadly Skylar lost the match to this weasel. A fiasco from start to end. Skylar would of loved the frozen ob 3 shot rule in this match.

The incidents of nursing an ob along a rail in OP does occur, but when the ob is frozen then I can imagine that the 3 shot rule would then be of significance. We currently have alternative playing rules within our Official rules, and this could be considered also. One goal of OP.org is to preserve the historical way one pocket is played, and for this reason we have alternative ways to play, such as opponent racks, ob jumped off table is not a foul. Plus OP.org considers adopting new rules such as; a ball made on the break, which IMO would be also an alternative game rule. So it is very viable to consider this frozen ob 3 shot rule as an alternative game rule.

One historical general rule we really need to adopt and preserve is our American way of playing BIH-BTL. To do this we need to strongly place this within our OP official rules. This is the only way of preserving it, outside of developing our own general rules. Whitey

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

Steve & members, the above post #41 I quoted the '68 rule for the 'Frozen OB 3 Shot Rule'. I happened to meet my wife at the library and I checked out a '96 Official BCA Rule Book, and the rule changed to a World Standardized Rule, in which the ob is not frozen but within a ball's width of the cushion. It is so poorly written, it not worth trying to explain it. But I checked this against my 2004 BCA rule book and they still kept it. No wonder WPA has eliminated this rule.
Another interesting '96 BCA rule pertaining to OP break it states; Starting player must (1) legally pocket an object ball into his targeted pocket, or (2) cause the cue ball to contact an object ball and after contact, at least one object ball must contact a cushion.

Wow, this is so poorly written, and it is as if (1) means if you are to continue shooting, and (2) omits the cue ball contacting a rail also constitutes a legal break. In '68 the break rule states; On the opening break only the cue ball or one object ball must be driven to the rail after initial hit. Beautifully Written in '68!!!

I believe we just had a member threaded questioning what constituted a legal break (2) whereas at least one object ball must contact a cushion, cue ball does not apply. So he was right during that period of time. In my 2004 book it mimics this rule but there is a note; Cue ball does not have to strike a rail on opening break.

I get severely disenchanted about how our good general rules get changed depending upon who happens to be in power at the time. BCA changed presidents like we change shirts. To much power!!!

I did find something interesting within the '68 OP game rule. It states; A legal safety as per rules of 14.1 must be played on each defensive shot.
I just have to wonder if would encompass the 'frozen ob - 3 shot rule for official tournament play, but of course have a different outcome penalty.

As has been noted by Jansco, for their first tournament the OP rules would apply the BCA 14.1 rules for their general rules, which back in those days the 14.1 was considered the general rules for all games.

Just thought I better clarify the post #41 'frozen ob - 3 shot rule as being from '68. You have to admire those rules writers in those days, for they often only had a single page to get down the basics of how a game was played. OP is approx. just over a half page long. 14.1 (championship game) is 13 pages long.

Thank goodness Steve wrote up his own OP rules! Whitey

 

[NH Steve]

Dennis, it sounds like you and I both like that 3 shot rule for object balls close to the rail -- but the other BIG thing that drives my overview of rules is the BIG question of "does it reduce arguments or add arguments?" I like rules that bring these qualities to the game:

• Fairness & trust -- rules that tend to build equal competitive opportunity and confidence in the game
• Rules that are easy to understand and easy to enforce
• Rules that tend to reduce player/player conflict and player/TD conflict
• Rules that contribute to the quality of the game itself -- attracting players and viewers

That's the kind of rules we want in my opinion. I'm not sure if either eliminating the frozen ball rule or adding a three nudge shot rule -- or both -- meet those criteria. We have our annual member tournament, or of course local tournaments that we can try these at.

 

[Dennis "Whitey" Young]

Dennis, it sounds like you and I both like that 3 shot rule for object balls close to the rail -- but the other BIG thing that drives my overview of rules is the BIG question of "does it reduce arguments or add arguments?" I like rules that bring these qualities to the game:

• Fairness & trust -- rules that tend to build equal competitive opportunity and confidence in the game
• Rules that are easy to understand and easy to enforce
• Rules that tend to reduce player/player conflict and player/TD conflict
• Rules that contribute to the quality of the game itself -- attracting players and viewers

That's the kind of rules we want in my opinion. I'm not sure if either eliminating the frozen ball rule or adding a three nudge shot rule -- or both -- meet those criteria. We have our annual member tournament, or of course local tournaments that we can try these at.

I agree with you four points. I personally would never eliminate the frozen ob legal shot rule. This is a historical general rule that op has always been played by. The frozen ob - 3 shot rule was a way to discourage leaving the cb in front of the ob that was frozen to a rail and not making a legal shot, and it was to also quicken up the game. I believe it stays an impartial rule, for it tries to thwart an illegal shot and on top of it the end result could be an option for BIH-BTL. Therefore it falls within your 4 point criteria, and thus could be a viable 'alternative' rule.

We have to remember 14.1 was the championship game and these rules were wrote with that in mind. There is a championship match viewed by spectators, and surely the wise rule makers did not want to put spectators through watching endlessly a ball being nursed. This is not a billiard game, and they did not want to turn it into a billiard game.

We could surmise that the 3 consecutive foul rule loss of game would take care of the frozen ball to rail illegal shot scenario, but it does not quite for a legal shot could occur and then the nursing keeps on going. Whereas an interim legal shot occurring does not circumvent the 'frozen ob - 3 shot rule.

I believe every rule I have suggested over the last 2-1/2 yrs. have fallen within your 4 point criteria, and would raise the standard of play for your players and the standard of excellence required to play OP.

Under your category of 'GAME' there could be a sub category developed for 'alternative general rules'. With the rise of popularity of op then the tournament directors are going to have to make up alternative rules to speed up the game. I wish OP.org would take the lead and create this sub category. We have had many of these alternative rules suggested, and you have suggested a few of your own, over the yrs.

If you had this category in place then at your MOT events the players would of already known possible alternatives they could discuss and decide upon.

Thanks Steve for sticking with us on these rule discussions! Whitey

 

[catkins]

the one thing I would add to you criteria is that a rule is consistent in it s enforcement and does not change based on the situation(though that also falls under the reduces arguments)