View Full Version : Ring game spot up order?
phil in sofla
02-18-2004, 03:06 PM
Around here, and probably everywhere, I suppose, when we play ring games in 9-ball, we play sort of the old push out 9-ball rules: no ball in hand, behind the line b-i-h only on scratches, if you pocket a ball and scratch the pocketed ball spots up, etc.
And, if you have ball in hand in the kitchen on a scratch, if the low ball on the table is IN the kitchen, it is the option of the shooter to have THAT ball spotted.
Now, normally, when you scratch and pocket a ball, that ball is the low ball on the table before that shot, but not always. Let's say you were shooting a 3-5 combination to get an early money ball, and the 5 goes, you scratch, and the 3 ball is in the kitchen.
Presumably this will lead to both the 3 and 5 on the long string, with one of them on the spot, one behind the one on the spot. In that scenario, would the 5 be on the spot, or would it be the 3?
To me, logic dictates the 5 should be there, as it MUST be spotted because of the scratch. Whether the 3 comes out of the kitchen to the spot or long string is optional, so far as I know, and if the shooter decided it was hanging for an easy kick, he could, if he chose, leave it in the kitchen, and shoot out of the kitchen for a 1, 2, 3 rail or more kick attempt.. I've had a couple of people agree with me on this.
However, several others, including one guy I was playing when this issue came up, say it ALWAYS goes in numerical order, so that the low ball ends up in the front-most position available on the long string of the two balls, on the spot unless that spot is already taken. He called a friend he says is a national road player, who agreed with that claim, he said.
Which is it, or do you think that may be a regional difference that varies?
02-18-2004, 03:11 PM
Good question and I am not sure of the answer. My mode of thinking says that the 5 ball fell first and the scratch occurred. Thus the 5 ball spots first, then the 3 ball since it was still on the table and has to be pulled from the kitchen. I would say 5-3 in this order.
Was it me? You can't hold me to anything I said during that ring game as I was losing and drinking at a frantic pace /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Kato~~~knows Phil won all the bread /ccboard/images/graemlins/mad.gif
phil in sofla
02-18-2004, 03:19 PM
That is my thinking as well, but even the other side guys agree that IS logical, but not how the rules work.
I am mindful that sometimes rules aren't the most logical things, so far as my version of logic goes, so I remain unsure.
phil in sofla
02-18-2004, 03:22 PM
No, it was a Corner Pocket guy. If YOU had just gotten off the phone claiming to have been talking to a national level road player, I'd at least have asked you who he was!
What's your opinion on the question, now that you're (presumably) sober, LOL!
02-18-2004, 03:22 PM
This is an good question! The way you describe it I also would say the 5 would spot first.
02-18-2004, 06:36 PM
We used to play 9 ball in Puerto Rico, the same way you have described it, and.........
....the guy you were playing is right; the low ball ALWAYS ends up in the front-most position available on the long string of the two balls, on the spot unless that spot is already taken.
Puerto Rico now plays World Standarized Rules....
<font color="blue">Billiards: A passionate sport for the mind and soul!</font color>
02-19-2004, 07:19 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote phil in sofla:</font><hr>
Presumably this will lead to both the 3 and 5 on the long string, with one of them on the spot, one behind the one on the spot. In that scenario, would the 5 be on the spot, or would it be the 3?<hr /></blockquote>
If the shooter decides to spot the 3-ball previous to his shooting, then it's as if you are spotting two balls at the same time, IMO. Then, the normal convention of spotting applies:
Spot the lowest numbered ball on the spot, ascending in order towards the foot of the table, as long as there is room. Rule 3.32 Spotting balls.
First time it happened to me in a tourney was a few months ago. I didnt know the rules, and after my opponent broke, made the 9ball, and scratched, I jumped up ready to runout. Then the TD comes over and says that the 1 is in the kitchen and gets spotted. So I ended up with the 1 on the spot, and the 9 ball froze behind it. Was disappointed, cause I had to play safe. Oh well, first time I had rules like that in any game other than a ring.
02-19-2004, 09:48 AM
I'd spot the 3 before the 5. Now, if the spot was already taken then it still would be spotted the same and the 3 would go first available spot then the 5. Still applies.
C.C.~~plays lots of ring games lately. does agree with road dog and Fred. Same shot IMHO
02-19-2004, 11:09 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Perk:</font><hr> First time it happened to me in a tourney was a few months ago. I didnt know the rules, and after my opponent broke, made the 9ball, and scratched, I jumped up ready to runout. Then the TD comes over and says that the 1 is in the kitchen and gets spotted. So I ended up with the 1 on the spot, and the 9 ball froze behind it. Was disappointed, cause I had to play safe. Oh well, first time I had rules like that in any game other than a ring. <hr /></blockquote>
Perk, I guess this tournament had modified rules other than what are typically played. Normally the one ball would stay down. (TE, BCA or WPA)
Here is a shot that you could play the next time under the same circumstances and it can be made frequently too. Granted, this is more practical in a ring game though. And the banking lanes need to be clear.
This shot was almost a standard reply to the 1-9 spot after a break, especially in ring games and before Texas Express rules.
To Phil, we’ve always played the lowest numbered ball is spotted up first. Also we didn’t have the option of kicking at the ball in the kitchen, it always spotted. Anyway, these are the rules for this part of the swamp. Your swamp seems to be a little different.
02-19-2004, 12:29 PM
I believe it would depend on the local.
However there is one rule we always used - there was no
bih but the next shooter always had the options of taking
the shot or making the next player shoot again if a foul
I am familiar with that shot from an article written awhile back by Grady in insidepool (as I recall). This particular time, I had no lanes open, and had to hide. The rules were crazy, my buddy just said that they are "old" school rules, but we just went along with them. Same people that use the ASA softball tourney sheets to produce double elim charts using exact number of players. Oh well, still an easy profit for use normally. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
~~~ rod, a man of few words today
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.