PDA

View Full Version : don't slop the obvious!



04-29-2002, 01:39 AM
Since "slop" is such a hot topic around hear at the moment, here is a little hypothetical situation designed to turn player against player.

We all know BCA 8-ball is a called shot game and we also realise that in reality not every shot is called because they are "obvious", ie. a plain straight shot into a pocket the ball is sitting in front of. However a shot is not considered obvious if it is a bank, kick or carom and must be explicitly called (not the bank/kick/carom - just the pocket).

So here's the situation. BCA 8-ball, a player is shooting for his last object ball and has the cue ball about two feet out from the corner pocket with his last object ball in between the cue and the corner (a fairly obvious shot). Doesn't call the shot, gives his ball a good wack and totally stuffs up, hitting the cushion before the pocket going round 4 cushions and ends up back in the original pocket he was intending (but didn't call).

Should he carry on shooting or should he sit down?

A four cushion bank is not an obvious shot, so according to convention he would have needed to call the pocket. Does anything other than a straight in shot void the implied obvious nomination? What if he was really going for a two cushion bank into the opposite corner and forgot to call it?

Just one reason you should call 100% of your shots...

MikeM
04-29-2002, 07:51 AM
If the original corner pocket is "a fairly obvious shot" you don't call the pocket. If it goes in that pocket, you stay at the table. Definitely slop, but it counts. This actually happens fairly often in my league, I've seen it at least three times this session (not a very high level league). If you make the ball in the pocket you intended, no matter how it gets there, it counts.

Personnaly, I think calling 100% of your shots gets very tedious. JMO

MM

04-29-2002, 08:11 PM
That's the way it goes, but I believe if you don't call the pocket for a four cushion bank then its no longer an obvious shot and your implied nomination doesn't count and needs to be explictly called for you to continue.

Like I said, how do I know he wasn't really going for the two cushion bank in the opposite corner??

Tom_In_Cincy
04-29-2002, 08:17 PM
That's why there are rules.

If you call the ball and its designated pocket.. who cares how it gets there?

If you don't like slop or "lucky" pool.. play 14.1 or one pocket.. and never complain again..

8 ball in bars and leagues draws its players from the human race... what do you expect..? we all can't be perfect...

cheesemouse
04-29-2002, 08:58 PM
I'm with Tom on this one; switch games if you can't handle luck.
You can't legislate luck, you can't repeal luck and I can't think of a ball and stick game that isn't sometimes won or lost with luck so just lay back and enjoy it and hope you stay close to even in the luck department....Geezzzzzzzzz!!

MikeM
04-29-2002, 09:16 PM
Because he didn't call it.

MM

04-29-2002, 11:52 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Tom_In_Cincy:</font><hr>
8 ball in bars and leagues draws its players from the human race... what do you expect..? we all can't be perfect...

Tom, 8 ball in bars or otherwise using BCA rules is call shot and if you make the 8 on the break it is spotted.
No slop.

<hr></blockquote>

04-30-2002, 12:10 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Tom_In_Cincy:</font><hr>If you don't like slop or "lucky" pool.. play 14.1 or one pocket.. and never complain again..

<hr></blockquote>

maybe i'm missing something here. i've seen this reference a couple of times and i think it's wrong. 14.1, the supposed "respectable" game is also a "slop" game insofar as bca only requires designation of ball and pocket. you can call the 6 cushion, double carom kick combo but if you accidently miscue and loft the sukka over the rack and into the intended hole then that's a point.

possibly the only non-slop game i can think of is that sillyass bar stuff where hitting the facing is a bank which must be called and if'n y'all plan on comin off the dead junebug yonder ya better call it or i get the cash.

( come to think of it, touching a bug; not part of the table "as manufactured", is a foul. i've got to remember that the next time i feel suicidal.)

as long as tables, sticks and balls can do crazy things to take balls away from me then i want it to cut both ways.

dan

TomBrooklyn
04-30-2002, 01:00 AM
Somewhat a matter of semantics, but when the shot is obvious, it is still a called shot. It is just not called out verbally. The called pocket is the obvious one being shot at. Therefore, if the ball misses the intended way and slops in some other way to the original "called pocket", it counts just as much as if it was "called" out loud. If the ball missed the obvious pocket and then fell into some other pocket via any assortment of banks, caroms, kisses, or combinations, that pocket would not be considered not the called pocket and the shooter would have no right to claim that was the intended pocket after the fact.

04-30-2002, 01:05 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: TomBrooklyn:</font><hr> Somewhat a matter of semantics, but when the shot is obvious, it is still a called shot. It is just not called out verbally. The called pocket is the obvious one being shot at. Therefore if the ball misses the intended way and slops in some other way to the original "called pocket", it counts just as much as if he verbalized it. If the player was trying to bank two rails to the other corner then he certainly must say so out loud as it is not obvious. <hr></blockquote>


clearly, it puts the burden on the shooter to call if he's doin somthin other than the obvious shot. he can't get up after that combo and say " that was the shot".

dan

Tom_In_Cincy
04-30-2002, 07:42 AM
HDJ.
I feel you missed the point.. Neither 14.1 or One Pocket is played on a bar table. Nor are there many leagues associated with these two games.

And, both of these games are played NORMALLY, by high skilled players, that do not do the 'cry baby' squawking about 'slop'

It might be a Texas thing, but here in the MidWest we call it LUCK not SLOP..

If you think that 14.1 has as much 'slop' as 8 or 9 ball.. you just haven't play 14.1 very much. 14.1 has very little 'slop', maybe about 1/10th that of 8 or 9 ball.. Less squawking.. anyway.. that's why it is suggested.

Luck=Slop

04-30-2002, 10:23 PM
Hi Dan,

Thats basically where I was going with this hypothetical situation. I think it shows yet another abiguity in the rules.

BCA 8-BALL RULES:
"4.2 CALL SHOT
In Call Shot, obvious balls and pockets do not have to be indicated. It is the opponent’s right to ask which ball and pocket if he is unsure of the shot. Bank shots and combination shots are not considered obvious, and care should be taken in calling both the object ball and the intended pocket. When calling the shot, it is never necessary to indicate details such as the number of cushions, banks, kisses, caroms, etc."...

It says that the obvious doesn't have to be called but then goes on to say that banks and combination shots are not considered obvious and MUST be called. If he called the corner then he should carry on shooting no doubt, but he didn't call it and it was a bank shot which is not considered obvious, so he HAD to have called it but didn't and so he should sit down and give the other guy a shot.

To the others that say I am just winging about luck - I am the biggest supporter of "just the ball and pocket" calling you could find - it certainly prevents a hell of a lot of arguments (but not this one), and I have no problem with luck happening, its just that the rules as they are seem to contradict what you would think should happen in this situation. The problem is with the implied calling going wrong.

04-30-2002, 10:51 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Ozzy8:</font><hr> Hi Dan,

its just that the rules as they are seem to contradict what you would think should happen in this situation. The problem is with the implied calling going wrong. <hr></blockquote>

all good points. the best i can give you, really, is that there is a convention, an agreement, among the bca ref-types that they don't want to discuss "intent of execution". they will simply ask what pocket was intended.

ot, at least, that's the way it seems to me.

dan