PDA

View Full Version : Proposed WPA rules revision on-line



Bob_Jewett
05-02-2005, 11:12 AM
Some time ago, the WPA asked me to rewrite the rules for pool. I've finally gotten it mostly done. I'm sure that things are missing, since it is a complete reorganization. There are a few substantive changes which mostly simplify things, I think.

I have the preliminary draft on-line and there is a feedback button by each item if you would like to correct/comment/blast anything.

http://www.sfbilliards.com/Rev1.html

The rules for one pocket are not done yet. I'm still pondering the differences between the rule book and the way people play.

The main difference you may notice is that there is no provision for playing without a referee. If you need one in the mean time, here it is: "The non-shooter will assume all the duties of the referee."

BigRigTom
05-02-2005, 11:16 AM
Hi Bob,
Quite an undertaking you have there.

How about the "Rules for Scotch Doubles"?
Should they be included?

Wally_in_Cincy
05-02-2005, 11:33 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> "The non-shooter will assume all the duties of the referee." <hr /></blockquote>

does that mean a questionable hit no longer "goes to the shooter?" or can the opponent call an unsportsmanlike foul?

What I read on there looks good so far

thanks

Bob_Jewett
05-02-2005, 12:47 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> "The non-shooter will assume all the duties of the referee." <hr /></blockquote>

does that mean a questionable hit no longer "goes to the shooter?" or can the opponent call an unsportsmanlike foul? <hr /></blockquote>
If you can't trust your opponent to make a good call, find a different opponent, or invite the TD over to make the call. I think it's much better to have the player decide when a call will be too close to trust the other player to call it.

But the official rules probably won't have a provision for unrefereed matches -- at least I was specifically asked to leave that part out.

dr_dave
05-02-2005, 01:10 PM
Bob,

Good job with the rules. I'm glad someone as capable as yourself has taken on this job. Please let us know when they become official and where they will be posted so people can refer and link to them.

Thanks,
Dave

dr_dave
05-02-2005, 01:15 PM
Concerning terminology, maybe "Jumped Ball" in Section 7.5 should be "Balls Driven off the Table" instead.

Also, where are illegal jump shots explicity prohibited? In other words, what prevents someone from scooping under the cue ball to lift it off the table? As can be seen in HSV A.1 (http://http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-1.htm), "illegal jump shots" are not always miscues (although they often are), and it is very difficult to tell whether or not it is a miscue without a high-speed camera.

Keep up the good work. I am very impressed with your level of dedication to our wonderful sport.

Regards,
Dave

SPetty
05-02-2005, 01:44 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Concerning terminology, maybe "Jumped Ball" in Section 7.5 should be "Balls Driven off the Table" instead.<hr /></blockquote>Hi dr_dave,

I hope you have also used the feedback button as Bob suggested to send in your comments.

dr_dave
05-02-2005, 01:53 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SPetty:</font><hr>I hope you have also used the feedback button as Bob suggested to send in your comments.<hr /></blockquote>
I will do that right now. I think it is also good for people to post remarks here in case there is any debate or better recommendations.

Regards,
Dave

Bob_Jewett
05-02-2005, 02:05 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> ... Also, where are illegal jump shots explicity prohibited? In other words, what prevents someone from scooping under the cue ball to lift it off the table? ... <hr /></blockquote>
That's covered by the new "Intentional Miscue" rule. There are shots other than jump shots which can be accomplished with miscues, and the new rule covers more bases. Sadly, some players don't know what a miscue is.

dr_dave
05-02-2005, 02:27 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> ... Also, where are illegal jump shots explicity prohibited? In other words, what prevents someone from scooping under the cue ball to lift it off the table? ... <hr /></blockquote>
That's covered by the new "Intentional Miscue" rule. There are shots other than jump shots which can be accomplished with miscues, and the new rule covers more bases. Sadly, some players don't know what a miscue is. <hr /></blockquote>
In the first shot in HSV A.1 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-1.htm), the scoop is accomplished without a miscue. Does that mean that shot would be allowed? The second shot in the video clip is obviously a miscue.

Maybe you can include specific language about "illegal jump shots" so this is clear. Regardless of whether there is a miscue or not, jumping the cue ball by hitting below the center should be illegal (or should it?).

Regards,
Dave

Bob_Jewett
05-02-2005, 02:49 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> ...
In the first shot in HSV A.1 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-1.htm), the scoop is accomplished without a miscue. Does that mean that shot would be allowed? The second shot in the video clip is obviously a miscue.
... <hr /></blockquote>
Sure looks like a miscue to me. The tip clearly doesn't have traction on the cue ball. Why do you feel it is not a miscue?

dr_dave
05-02-2005, 03:09 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> ...
In the first shot in HSV A.1 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-1.htm), the scoop is accomplished without a miscue. Does that mean that shot would be allowed? The second shot in the video clip is obviously a miscue.
... <hr /></blockquote>
Sure looks like a miscue to me. The tip clearly doesn't have traction on the cue ball. Why do you feel it is not a miscue? <hr /></blockquote>
I guess it depends on how you define "miscue." Maybe you should include a clear definition in the document. In the first shot of HSV A.1 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-1.htm), there is only a single hit on the cue ball and there is no sliding of the cue tip on the cue ball. The reason for this is the table is supporting the stick, preventing it from deflecting away during contact. Some people might think this is not a "miscue." HSV 2.1, the 2nd shot in HSV A.1, HSV A.12-A.15, and HSV A.43-A.45 are obvious "miscues," and I think everybody would agree with that; but the 1st shot in HSV A.1 looks very different from these shots. All of these clips can be viewed here (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/index.html).

This probably isn't worth debating, because everybody knows it is illegal to scoop under the ball; however, rules should be precise and not contain loopholes, where possible.

Regards,
Dave

Sid_Vicious
05-02-2005, 03:55 PM
I had a guy once holler out, "FOUL, and I'll tell you why, you scooped the ball!" I jump dart style, and if anyone can tell me how you can scoop a ball without an extreme ergonomic shew in the stance, I'd like to hear it. Actually the regulars at the PH joke intermittently after that when I go for a hop :-) This guy is a cry baby when there's cash on the line....sid

tateuts
05-02-2005, 04:26 PM
Initially, I think you've done a terrific job. This has cleared up some of the gray areas of double hits, shooting through balls, etc.

I have a question about the push foul. Can you explain a situation in which a push foul might occur? Are you thinking when the cueball is frozen to a rack, and someone might shove the ball through it?

Chris

tateuts
05-02-2005, 04:40 PM
7.8 Double Hit feedback
If the cue stick contacts the cue ball more than once on a shot, the shot is a foul.

- I would change this to "cue tip" or add "this does not apply to unintentional miscues". Under this definition, an unintentional miscue could be a double hit.

Chris

Bob_Jewett
05-02-2005, 07:32 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote tateuts:</font><hr> ... I have a question about the push foul. Can you explain a situation in which a push foul might occur? Are you thinking when the cueball is frozen to a rack, and someone might shove the ball through it? <hr /></blockquote>
Suppose the cue ball is frozen to a ball. If you come up to the cue ball slowly, and stop the tip at the ball, and then start moving the tip forward again, gradually, you can make the cue ball go more or less straight ahead in spite of the object ball. It helps to jack up on this. It is a foul that most players don't know, but there is was a semi-pro in this area who used to even teach the method. Another example: cue ball frozen to the object ball as in the "Hustler" bank shot (from the first scene, and in Willie Mosconi's "Winning Pocket Billiards"), but play the shot by using slow english on the cue ball to walk the object ball sideways along the cushion.

A push shot can be made with a single contact. A push shot is not like a typical double hit. See the RSB FAQ for more details.

If the cue ball is frozen to the rack, the double hit rule may apply, depending on how the balls are sitting.

Rod
05-02-2005, 10:43 PM
Bob, I think you did a fine inital draft. I sent some emails and I hope others will as well. I only did a quick review and may have overlooked a specific rule, but it is a very good start.

Rod

randyg
05-03-2005, 05:35 AM
Great job Bob and thanks....SPF-randyg

dr_dave
05-03-2005, 07:36 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote tateuts:</font><hr> ... I have a question about the push foul. Can you explain a situation in which a push foul might occur?<hr /></blockquote>
Another example: cue ball frozen to the object ball as in the "Hustler" bank shot (from the first scene, and in Willie Mosconi's "Winning Pocket Billiards"), but play the shot by using slow english on the cue ball to walk the object ball sideways along the cushion.<hr /></blockquote>
For people who want to see this shot, I have a demonstration at NV A.2 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/normal_videos/new/NVA-2.htm) and a high-speed video clip at HSV A.23 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-23.htm). It is also described and illustrated in my August '04 article (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/bd_articles/index.html). In the high-speed clip, there is a double hit but it was very difficult to tell (without the high-speed camera). I suspect the shot in NV A.2 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/normal_videos/new/NVA-2.htm) was also a double hit (judging from the sound); but again, it is difficult to tell.

Bob, how would you rule on this shot?

Thanks,
Dave

Cane
05-03-2005, 07:47 AM
Bob,
Excellent job. I sent two feedbacks, one on a typo, but the other, I thought I'd bring up here. Unless I just completely read past it and didn't see it, you have no restriction on length of jump cues. I believe the World Standardized Rules restrict them to a min. of 40" long but saw no length restriction in the General Rules. Wouldn't bother me if there wasn't! I can jump chalks width away from a blocker with shaft only, but currently, I don't know of any sanctioning body that would allow shaft only jump shots.

Great job,
Bob

dr_dave
05-03-2005, 08:23 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rules:</font><hr>
A ball may settle slightly after it appears to have stopped, possibly due to slight imperfections in the ball or the table. Unless this causes a ball to fall into a pocket, it is considered a normal hazard of play, and the ball will not be moved back. If a ball falls into a pocket as the result of such settling, it is replaced as close as possible to its original position.<hr /></blockquote>
What if an object ball stops on the edge of a pocket and falls in a short period later. Is there a specified duration under which this would count as a pot? The way the rule is written, it seems to me that if a ball trickles in even a fraction of a second after "stopping," the pot does not count (and the opponent would have ball in hand if nothing hit a rail). Is that the case?

Thanks,
Dave

dr_dave
05-03-2005, 08:32 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rules:</font><hr>
A ball may settle slightly after it appears to have stopped, possibly due to slight imperfections in the ball or the table. Unless this causes a ball to fall into a pocket, it is considered a normal hazard of play, and the ball will not be moved back. If a ball falls into a pocket as the result of such settling, it is replaced as close as possible to its original position.<hr /></blockquote>
What if an object ball stops on the edge of a pocket and falls in a short period later. Is there a specified duration under which this would count as a pot? The way the rule is written, it seems to me that if a ball trickles in even a fraction of a second after "stopping," the pot does not count (and the opponent would have ball in hand if nothing hit a rail). Is that the case?<hr /></blockquote>
I just found this statement in Section 9.3:
If a ball stops near the brink of a pocket, and remains apparently motionless for five seconds, it is not considered pocketed if it later falls into the pocket by itself.
That clears it Section 6.7, but Section 6.7 should probably have a reference to Section 9.3 so there is no confusion.

dr_dave
05-03-2005, 08:48 AM
Section 2.7 states:
A player wins if he legally pockets the eight ball after his group has been cleared.

Does this prohibit a player from calling the 8-ball on the same shot of the last group ball, provided the last group ball goes in first?

dr_dave
05-03-2005, 08:52 AM
Section 2.4 states:
Before groups are determined, the table is said to be "open," and before each shot, the player must call his intended group. The shot is then governed by all rules that apply after groups are determined.

Does this mean that when the table is "open," a player can't hit a stripe first to pocket a solid?

dr_dave
05-03-2005, 08:58 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Section 2.4 states:
Before groups are determined, the table is said to be "open," and before each shot, the player must call his intended group. The shot is then governed by all rules that apply after groups are determined.

Does this mean that when the table is "open," a player can't hit a stripe first to pocket a solid? <hr /></blockquote>

I ask this because it would be in disagreement with BCA World Standardized Rule 4.9 which states:
When the table is open, it is legal to hit a solid first to make a stripe of vice-versa

dr_dave
05-03-2005, 09:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Section 2.7 states:
A player wins if he legally pockets the eight ball after his group has been cleared.

Does this prohibit a player from calling the 8-ball on the same shot of the last group ball, provided the last group ball goes in first?<hr /></blockquote>

Does the following statement in Section 6.6 disallow such a shot?

Only one ball may be called on each shot.

If so, maybe there should be a references to Section 6.6 in Section 2.7.

dr_dave
05-03-2005, 09:10 AM
I see no mention of a safety shot (AKA "in and safe") in the 8-ball or general rules. Does that mean this is not allowed (i.e., the player that pockets an object ball must remain at the table)?

Fran Crimi
05-03-2005, 09:46 AM
Hey Dr. Dave,

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't each section have a button you can click to send Bob your comments? I was thinking that might make things easier for him rather than have him sift through the questions here.

Thanks,
Fran

DickLeonard
05-03-2005, 10:22 AM
Bob just as long as you get rid of the 15 point foul and a rerack if you interfere with a cueball scratching in 14.1.
####

dr_dave
05-03-2005, 10:27 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr>Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't each section have a button you can click to send Bob your comments? I was thinking that might make things easier for him rather than have him sift through the questions here.<hr /></blockquote>
I am aware of the buttons, and I have used them to send the questions posted here plus other smaller comments not worthy of posting here.

The reason I have posted some of my questions here is, depending on Bob's responses, there might be some debate. I'm hoping debate and input from others will help Bob create the best possible document.

Regards,
Dave

Bob_Jewett
05-03-2005, 12:51 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cane:</font><hr> ... Unless I just completely read past it and didn't see it, you have no restriction on length of jump cues. ... <hr /></blockquote>
It's not my job to specify equipment. And those who enjoy using and selling jump cues and phenolic tips really, really don't want me to make the rule.

Bob_Jewett
05-03-2005, 01:36 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> (Dr. Dave's scoop shot)
Sure looks like a miscue to me. The tip clearly doesn't have traction on the cue ball. Why do you feel it is not a miscue? <hr /></blockquote>
So I tried the scoop shot this morning. You need to slide the stick along the cloth towards the bottom of the ball. With a hard tip (on a jump/break cue), the shot was a miscue every time. But with an Elk Master tip, there was a miscue only part of the time, judging by careful inspection of the tip after each shot.

As I understand the scoop shot without a miscue -- that is, without the tip slipping on the cue ball -- it works by having tremendous squirt. What I don't understand is why it doesn't get more draw.

Bob_Jewett
05-03-2005, 01:40 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote tateuts:</font><hr> 7.8 Double Hit feedback
If the cue stick contacts the cue ball more than once on a shot, the shot is a foul.

- I would change this to "cue tip" or add "this does not apply to unintentional miscues". Under this definition, an unintentional miscue could be a double hit.

Chris <hr /></blockquote>
Yes, it could be a double hit, and maybe the unintentional miscue needs to be mentioned explicitly as being exempt. Right now, it's just understood that a double hit is not called on a miscue unless it is plainly visible.

Bob_Jewett
05-03-2005, 01:43 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Section 2.7 states:
A player wins if he legally pockets the eight ball after his group has been cleared.

Does this prohibit a player from calling the 8-ball on the same shot of the last group ball, provided the last group ball goes in first? <hr /></blockquote>
Yes, because only one ball may be called on each shot.

Bob_Jewett
05-03-2005, 01:45 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> ...
I ask this because it would be in disagreement with BCA World Standardized Rule 4.9 which states:
When the table is open, it is legal to hit a solid first to make a stripe of vice-versa <hr /></blockquote>
Yes, but the new rule is a simplification. Under the old rule, it was still a foul to hit the eight ball first on an open table.

Bob_Jewett
05-03-2005, 01:52 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DickLeonard:</font><hr> Bob just as long as you get rid of the 15 point foul and a rerack if you interfere with a cueball scratching in 14.1.
#### <hr /></blockquote>
In the revised rules as they stand, intentionally touching any ball is unsportmanlike conduct. While it may save some time to catch a scratching cue ball, I think it's a really bad idea to do it in tournaments with a referee.

dr_dave
05-03-2005, 02:14 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> ...
I ask this because it would be in disagreement with BCA World Standardized Rule 4.9 which states:
When the table is open, it is legal to hit a solid first to make a stripe of vice-versa<hr /></blockquote>
Yes, but the new rule is a simplification.<hr /></blockquote>
I personally like the BCA rule better. When the table is open and no group is yet declared, I think all group balls (i.e., any ball except the 8-ball) should be fair game (i.e., the table should be totally "open").

Also, IMO, the revised rule (Section 2.4):

Before groups are determined, the table is said to be "open," and before each shot, the player must call his intended group. The shot is then governed by all rules that apply after groups are determined. (BTW, I assume that the "is governed by all rules" part is what prohibits a stripe from being hit first if a solid is called when the table is open.)

is actually more complex than the BCA Standardize Rule (Section 4.9):

The table is "open" when the choice of groups (stripes or solids) has not yet been determined. When the table is open, it is legal to hit a solid first to make a stripe or vice-versa. Note - the table is always open immediately after a break shot.

Also, I prefer not limit the creative options made possible by a BCA "open" table.

Bottom line: I disagree with your change.
What do others think?

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr>Under the old rule, it was still a foul to hit the eight ball first on an open table.<hr /></blockquote>
I agree this should not be changed.

Bob, thanks again for your efforts,
Dave

dr_dave
05-03-2005, 02:21 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr>As I understand the scoop shot without a miscue -- that is, without the tip slipping on the cue ball -- it works by having tremendous squirt. What I don't understand is why it doesn't get more draw.<hr /></blockquote>
The extra squirt comes from the vertical force between the table and the cue stick. This force actually reduces draw because it creates a moment about the cue ball center in a direction (CCW in the video (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-1.htm)) opposite from the direction of the horizontal cue tip force (CW in the video).

Regards,
Dave

Bob_Jewett
05-03-2005, 02:33 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>..
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr>Under the old rule, it was still a foul to hit the eight ball first on an open table.<hr /></blockquote>
I agree this should not be changed. ... <hr /></blockquote>
But there is no point in saying you can't use the eight ball if you're not going to restrict which group will be hit first. It's inconsistent and complicated.

I'm pretty sure that a couple of years ago you could play the eight first on an open table, but then it was changed so you could hit it first but couldn't continue, and now it is a foul. The rule doesn't have a lot of tradition behind it.

Bob_Jewett
05-03-2005, 03:42 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Vagabond:</font><hr> I always thought that the framers of the rules in pool had questionable skills in English language and also lack the abilty to cosider the variables and apply Aristotelian logic.... <hr /></blockquote>
As one of the former members of the BCA Rules Committee, I resemble that remark.

(The BCA rules grew by accretion and patching rather than by intelligent design.)

As far as staying in ones chair, there was a discussion about that for a one pocket tournament, and for a lot of one pocket situations, it's unreasonable to ask the player to return to his chair after every shot. Or, we can all wait for a lot of walking. I think the specifics of player behaviour is an area that I wasn't supposed to cover directly. While there is a rule about distraction (as unsportsmanlike conduct) there is no explicit rule now about breaking down the cue stick.

DickLeonard
05-05-2005, 06:17 AM
Bob your cueball is scratching and you catch the cueball, the balls are all over the table and instead of your opponent getting an open table,the balls are reracked and the offender gets to play an opening safety.

Who is getting punished? When I won the lag in 14.1 I always chose to break. I practiced the breakshot more than any other shot. On new cloth who has the advantage.?

I rode back from the 1974 US.Open with Irving Crane and we discussed the advantage of catching the cueball and taking the 15 ball penalty. After that everyone thought Irv was losing it, he would miss and grab the cueball.

Just my thought on a stupid rule.####

Bob_Jewett
05-05-2005, 10:54 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DickLeonard:</font><hr> Bob your cueball is scratching and you catch the cueball, the balls are all over the table and instead of your opponent getting an open table,the balls are reracked and the offender gets to play an opening safety.
... <hr /></blockquote>
Hi Dick,

I see your point now. In fact, intentionally touching the cue ball with your hand is an unsportmanlike conduct foul, and right now the referee is directed to penalize it at least as severely as an intentional foul, but is given leeway on the penalty. If I were the ref, I'd do 1-point + 15-points plus the incoming player has ball in hand in balk, but that depends on the player.

DickLeonard
05-05-2005, 04:04 PM
Bob that is the right rule, a 16 pt penalty and the incoming player has his choice.####

Imcueless
05-06-2005, 05:15 PM
Hello,
I appologize for asking an off topic question, but Ive searched for chairs and got 3 results this being one of the better ones.

Im not a pool player, looking to buy anniversary gift for folks, saw these chairs, seem a little tall to me,
if you could give them a look Id appreciate it. They cost what is to me a lot of money so I dont wanna get screwed.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&amp;category=21210&amp;item=7153562 078&amp;rd=1&amp;ssPageName=WDVW

I appreciate, Im clueless on all things billards. Im pretty good on computer so if I can return the favor at anytime just pm me.

I never knew there was so much to know about pool, I think thats pretty cool. Who would have thought that there would be a proper LUMENS for lighting like I read in one thread.

awesome, Im a gamer/a+ networking guy so I dig it when people get into their hobbys with passion. /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Bob_Jewett
05-08-2005, 07:23 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> ...
I have the preliminary draft on-line and there is a feedback button by each item if you would like to correct/comment/blast anything. http://www.sfbilliards.com/Rev1.html

... <hr /></blockquote>
I've attached the comments received so far (most of them anyway), so you can view the suggestions. There is a button for each rule that's had feedback.

John_Madden
05-09-2005, 05:52 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> Some time ago, the WPA asked me to rewrite the rules for pool. I've finally gotten it mostly done. I'm sure that things are missing, since it is a complete reorganization. There are a few substantive changes which mostly simplify things, I think.

I have the preliminary draft on-line and there is a feedback button by each item if you would like to correct/comment/blast anything.
<hr /></blockquote>

Bob,
What a huge job you have undertaken. See you have a monthly article in The Break. Your detailed instructions are very clear - you give lots of "what and why" comments based on your play which makes the instruction much better than "just do it". Probably why you have been asked to take on the rewrite project - good at thinking about all the scenerios. How is the bay area now? Loved the weather when I "worked" there - best part was the pool. When I visit San Francisco (have family in CA), would love to play you for old times.
Jack
www.johnmaddencues.com (http://www.johnmaddencues.com)

Bob_Jewett
05-13-2005, 05:25 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote John_Madden:</font><hr> ... How is the bay area now? Loved the weather when I "worked" there - best part was the pool. When I visit San Francisco (have family in CA), would love to play you for old times.
Jack
www.johnmaddencues.com (http://www.johnmaddencues.com) <hr /></blockquote>
Hi Jack,

The old California Billiards has been more or less replaced by Edgie's (Milpitas) and California Billiard Club (Mt. View). There seems to be not as much action around as there used to be.

John_Madden
05-13-2005, 07:37 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr>
Hi Jack,

The old California Billiards has been more or less replaced by Edgie's (Milpitas) and California Billiard Club (Mt. View). There seems to be not as much action around as there used to be. <hr /></blockquote>
Do you see Memo (Memorex Bob)? Tell Poker Paul hi for me. I saw Chicken awhile back he was selling cues - do you see him anymore? I had nice surprise. You know you play in a room and are aware of other players and guys watching but don't think too much about it - time goes by and they are nice memories. For the last couple years I have talked to a guy that I hadn't thought I had met, he didn't know me when we talked. Well he checked out my web page, saw my picture, and emailed me that he was surprised about the gray hair. I didn't think much about it. Well I finally met him at the Hopkins Super Expo. He said "I know you, I watched you play ---- at ---- and ----etc" He said he didn't connect the name but made the connection after he checked out my webpage last summer. And the guy was none other than the cuemaker, JIM BUSS! Nice true story.
Jack
www.johnmaddencues.com (http://www.johnmaddencues.com)

Ralph_Kramden
10-10-2007, 02:16 PM
Maybe this has been talked about before but I missed it if it has.
The rules for 9 ball state that the balls be racked in a diamond shape with the 1 ball on the footspot. Watching some of the games on TV the 9 ball appears to be placed on the footspot and the 1 ball placed above it on the longstring closer to the center of the table.
Do they do this just for TV to pocket balls on the break more easily or have the rules for nine ball changed? I'm somewhat confused.
With a softer break it seems the 1 ball almost always heads for the side pocket and/or the ball racked next to the nine ball heads for a corner pocket.

Jager85
10-12-2007, 11:58 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> ...
In the first shot in HSV A.1 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-1.htm), the scoop is accomplished without a miscue. Does that mean that shot would be allowed? The second shot in the video clip is obviously a miscue.
... <hr /></blockquote>
Sure looks like a miscue to me. The tip clearly doesn't have traction on the cue ball. Why do you feel it is not a miscue? <hr /></blockquote>
I guess it depends on how you define "miscue." Maybe you should include a clear definition in the document. In the first shot of HSV A.1 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-1.htm), there is only a single hit on the cue ball and there is no sliding of the cue tip on the cue ball. The reason for this is the table is supporting the stick, preventing it from deflecting away during contact. Some people might think this is not a "miscue." HSV 2.1, the 2nd shot in HSV A.1, HSV A.12-A.15, and HSV A.43-A.45 are obvious "miscues," and I think everybody would agree with that; but the 1st shot in HSV A.1 looks very different from these shots. All of these clips can be viewed here (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/index.html).

This probably isn't worth debating, because everybody knows it is illegal to scoop under the ball; however, rules should be precise and not contain loopholes, where possible.

Regards,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

I agree with both. It does still seem like a miscue to me but my definition is different from yours. Although it is intended to prevent scooping as well, specifially stating it in the rules will prevent many debates down the road.

Jager

Bob_Jewett
10-14-2007, 07:14 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ralph_Kramden:</font><hr> ... Watching some of the games on TV the 9 ball appears to be placed on the footspot and the 1 ball placed above it on the longstring closer to the center of the table.
Do they do this just for TV to pocket balls on the break more easily or have the rules for nine ball changed? ... <hr /></blockquote>
To the extent that they mess with the breaking rules for major tournaments, it is to make it harder to make a ball on the break. The problem is that if the rack is truly tight, the wing ball goes in almost all the time. I measured 90% of the time in one World Tournament, and half of the remaining time some other ball went in. That made it roughly 95% chance of a ball on the break.

Usually this is not an issue in room play because the rack area is so pitted and uneven and the balls so mismatched that it is not possible to get a tight rack.

On the EuroTour, I've heard that they require some number of balls (3?) to go above the head string on the break to avoid soft, controlled breaks. It's not a foul to fail to get balls above the head string, but if you fail to, you lose your turn even if you made a ball on the break.

As far as the rack/break is concerned, nine ball is fundamentally flawed. If the rack is tight, a ball will go in; if the rack is loose, the player has been cheated.