PDA

View Full Version : Frozen ball safety.



Chopstick
12-19-2005, 11:36 AM
This question has been bothering me for a while. I was in a hill/hill eight ball match and my opponent wound up with the cueball frozen to one of his last object balls. I thought I had the match from there.

He pushed the cueball straight off the object ball to the rail and I had no shot. I called a foul and he said no it wasn't because the object "rocked". Well, it may have. It certainly didn't move from the spot it was on. I didn't see it do anything. The guy was the US Amateur Champion so I figured he knew more than me and I let it go. I lost the match because of it.

The rules seem to indicate that I was right. What do you guys think?

supergreenman
12-19-2005, 12:50 PM
If in fact the OB moved, it would have been a legal shot. on a shot like that a judge should have been called in to watch the shot prior to him shooting.

To late now.

James

Deeman3
12-19-2005, 01:51 PM
Chopstick,

I do think the rules support you in that rocking may not indicate a contact by the cue ball. However, he might plead that you didn't call a referee or did not make arrangements to observe it closely. Oout onthe open table, I can't remember a ball making contact and rocking a ball without moving it. I guess, if it happened at a distance we would never notice it anyway.

I probably would have argued with the guy to the point I was thrown out of the tournament, don' my best Earl impression.... By the way, didn't you make a bad hit on that last nine that beat me in the tournament we played??? Just kidding, I gotta have some kind of excuse.

SPetty
12-19-2005, 02:06 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr>I do think the rules support you in that rocking may not indicate a contact by the cue ball. <hr /></blockquote>I don't think so. If your opponent was snuggled up next to one of your balls and your ball rocked as they were shooting off it, you'd call that a foul, right? Same thing only backwards... /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Chopstick
12-19-2005, 02:16 PM
<font color="blue">This rule is poorly written. If you read it one way, since you are already in contact with the object ball, all you are required to do is push off of it to the rail.</font color>

3.38 OBJECT BALL FROZEN TO CUSHION OR CUE BALL
This rule applies to any shot where the cue ballís first contact with a ball is with one that is frozen to a cushion or to the cue ball itself. After the cue ball makes contact with the frozen object ball, <font color="blue"> How do you make contact with a ball you are frozen to?</font color> the shot must result in either:

(a) A ball being pocketed, or;

(b) The cue ball contacting a cushion, or;

(c) The frozen ball being caused to contact a cushion attached to a separate rail, or;

(d) Another object ball being caused to contact a cushion with which it was not already in contact. Failure to satisfy one of those four requirements is a foul. (Note: 14.1 and other games specify additional requirements and applications of this rule; see specific game rules.) A ball which is touching a cushion at the start of a shot and then is forced into a cushion attached to the same rail is not considered to have been driven to that cushion unless it leaves the cushion, contacts another ball, and then contacts the cushion again. An object ball is not considered frozen to a cushion unless it is examined and announced as such by either the referee or one of the players prior to that object ball being involved in a shot.

Tom_In_Cincy
12-19-2005, 02:18 PM
3.18 FAILURE TO CONTACT OBJECT BALL
It is a foul if on a stroke the cue ball fails to make contact with any legal object ball first. Playing away from a touching ball does not constitute having hit that ball.

Spetty is correct, Deeman2 is almost correct

IT was a foul. By his own admission, according to the rules, his shooting away from the ball, constituted a FOUL

Fran Crimi
12-19-2005, 02:31 PM
It's considered making contact if it rocks. There isn't anything in the rules that state that you must see the object ball travel in order for it to constitute a hit.

For example, a common situation in 14.1 is where your opponent has played a safety by resting the cb against an intact rack of balls. You play a safety off the pack by just skimming one of the balls. None of the balls roll because they're all frozen against each other and you're striking the cb softly. Yet it's considered a good hit as long as the cb makes it to the rail. Happens a lot. The only way to tell if the cb made contact with an ob is if it rocks.

Obviously, the key in the situation you described is in quickly discovering the intent of the shooter and stopping him from shooting to get someone to watch the shot.

Fran

Fran Crimi
12-19-2005, 02:35 PM
Aren't we assuming here that the ball rocked due to contact with the cue ball? Are we talking about a ball rocking due to something other than contact? If that's the case, then Tom is correct. If the player shot away, where it was obvious there was not contact, then the ball rocking had nothing to do with contact.

I would think that anything up to a 90 degree angle from the point where the two balls are frozen, would constitute contact if the ball rocks.

Fran

Deeman3
12-19-2005, 02:45 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SPetty:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr>I do think the rules support you in that rocking may not indicate a contact by the cue ball. <hr /></blockquote>I don't think so. If your opponent was snuggled up next to one of your balls and your ball rocked as they were shooting off it, you'd call that a foul, right? Same thing only backwards... /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif
<hr /></blockquote>

<font color="blue"> I donno...but to continue to be the Devil's advocate. If the object ball (Belonging to Chop's opponent) was in a dimple and not centered in that dimple, as you shot the cue ball away from that ball, it would "settle" into the center of that dimple. You had not contacted the object ball but it had "rocked" as the cue ball departed but never initiated contact with that ball. Foul. </font color>

Deeman
not sure but trying to see every bump and grind....

Bob_Jewett
12-19-2005, 03:15 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr> ... He pushed the cueball straight off the object ball to the rail and I had no shot.... <hr /></blockquote>
I assume you mean that he shot away from the object ball rather than partly into it. You must shoot partly into a frozen ball to get credit for having hit it. That means that you have to shoot "ahead" of the tangent line. If shooting directly towards the object ball would be 0 degrees, you could get credit for shooting at + or - 89 degrees, but if you shoot at 180 degrees, you do not get credit for having hit the ball.

If the rules you're using say otherwise, they're broken.

A player does not get credit (or blame) if the object ball moves just due to settling when shooting away.

Chopstick
12-19-2005, 03:15 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Tom_In_Cincy:</font><hr> 3.18 FAILURE TO CONTACT OBJECT BALL
It is a foul if on a stroke the cue ball fails to make contact with any legal object ball first. Playing away from a touching ball does not constitute having hit that ball.

Spetty is correct, Deeman2 is almost correct

IT was a foul. By his own admission, according to the rules, his shooting away from the ball, constituted a FOUL <hr /></blockquote><font color="blue">I think Tom has it. </font color>

Playing away from a touching ball does not constitute having hit that ball.

<font color="blue">That's what I thought. You can't hit a ball you are frozen to. Just like when the ball is frozen to a rail. I know he was frozen to the ball because I checked it. What he did was shoot a micron into the ball producing the supposed "rocking". Under rule 3.18, it doesn't matter whether it rocked or not. In the case of 14.1 the ball you skim is not the ball you are frozen to.</font color>

Bob_Jewett
12-19-2005, 03:20 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr> ... You can't hit a ball you are frozen to. <hr /></blockquote>
No. If you are frozen to the one ball, and you shoot partly into the one ball, you get credit for having hit the one ball. I think this has never been in question in games where it is permitted to shoot towards frozen balls.

Chopstick
12-19-2005, 03:25 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr> ... You can't hit a ball you are frozen to. <hr /></blockquote>
No. If you are frozen to the one ball, and you shoot partly into the one ball, you get credit for having hit the one ball. I think this has never been in question in games where it is permitted to shoot towards frozen balls. <hr /></blockquote>


Why doesn't that conflict with rule 3.18?

Bob_Jewett
12-19-2005, 03:44 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr> ... Why doesn't that conflict with rule 3.18? <hr /></blockquote>
The portion of 3.18 quoted above talks about shooting away from a frozen ball.

Here is how the proposed revision of the WPA rules reads for this case:

<font color="blue"> However, if the cue ball is touching an object ball at the start of the shot, it is legal to shoot towards or partly into that ball (provided it is a legal target within the rules of the game) and if the object ball is moved by such a shot, it is considered to have been contacted by the cue ball. ... </font color>

SPetty
12-19-2005, 03:45 PM
Okay, let's wei (http://endeavor.med.nyu.edu/~wei/pool/pooltable2.html) it:

START(
%AN7O5%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%Jf3O5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%Pg7O5%UQ4D3%Vg4O4%W r3O4%Xg8O3
%[g3D5%\g7O3
)END

The cueball is frozen to the ten ball. If you shoot along the reddish/brown line, even if the ten ball rocks or wiggles, it is a foul. If you shoot along the light blue line and the ten ball rocks or wiggles, it is not a foul. If you shoot along the yellow line, it is not a foul.

Which was the one your opponent did?

supergreenman
12-19-2005, 03:51 PM
It is possible to shoot along the green line and still be within the rules as you are shooting at an angle less than 90. therefore contact with the OB must occur.
START(
%AN7O5%BL7P8%CJ5O4%DL7N1%EM7P1%FK6P1%GK6N8%HM7N8%I L7O4%Jf3O5
%KJ5P7%LJ5N2%MK6Q4%NJ5R0%OJ5M0%Pg7O5%UQ4D3%Vg4O4%W r3O4%Xg8O3
%Yf8D6%Zg4N7%[g3D5%\g7O3
)END

James

Chopstick
12-19-2005, 05:38 PM
It was along the blue line, or the green line that supergreenman illustrated. So, I guess you guys say it wasn't a foul.

OK, fine. I'm gonna go hunt that feller down and give him a proper thrashing like I should have done in the first place. /ccboard/images/graemlins/mad.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

supergreenman
12-19-2005, 06:36 PM
Give him hell chopstick!!!!!!! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Billy_Bob
12-20-2005, 08:04 AM
In the case of the cue ball very close to an object ball, if I was the shooter, before I shot, I would declare the balls "frozen" or "not frozen", then give my opponent an opportunity to inspect the balls and call a ref to watch my hit if they wanted. A normal hit would be legal if the balls are frozen, but the same would be a "double hit" if the balls were not frozen.

And for an object ball very close to the cushion, before hitting, I would declare the ball "frozen to the cushion" or "not frozen to the cushion", then give my opponent an opportunity to inspect the balls and call a ref to watch my hit if they wanted. In this situation, the "a ball must hit a rail after hit" rule comes into play. It may happen that the only ball to hit a rail is the object ball. And after the hit, the opponent may argue that the ball was frozen to the rail and the hit was a foul.

If I am the opponent, then I would call a ref over for these shots.

In either case, I want to CYA and make it clear to my opponent that the balls are frozen or not frozen prior to my hit. This saves a lot of arguments after the hit.

Sid_Vicious
12-20-2005, 08:45 AM
Think you might have misunderstood the intent of the question. As I take it, the balls were frozen(which doesn't matter to this topic as I see it), the shooter shot off angle and barely wiggled the OB, rolled to a rail with the CB, which in my understanding would be legal. I asked the same question years ago and I was told by a local ref, but not one I'm particularly keen on for rulings, that some measure of displacement of the OB(frozen mind you, loose doesn't matter) is necessary for legality.

In my view, had the OB bobbled even minutely, then it is legally moved. I've hit my intented ball in 9-ball so slightly that you would really have to be a focusing player to see it, and yet it did graze that ball, hence it goes to me the shooter. A judge or ref is really needed beforehand, but can you ALWAYS call one, cuz these things just happen sometimes. I dunno the real answer...sid

Billy_Bob
12-20-2005, 08:59 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Sid_Vicious:</font><hr> Think you might have misunderstood the intent of the question... <hr /></blockquote>

Yes I understood the question. I was just saying what I do to cover *all* frozen ball situations. So for this specific situation, the advice would be to call a ref before the shot.

Arguments over frozen/not frozen balls [after the shot] are quite common when the players do not declare them frozen/not frozen *before* the shot, and don't call a ref.

PHJ314
12-20-2005, 11:45 AM
if the cue balll and object ball are frozen...plain and simple you call a Ref...ALWAYS!

SpiderMan
12-20-2005, 12:27 PM
On perfect equipment, if the object ball moved, then he must have shot ever so slightly into it, ie he "hit" it.

On bad equipment, it's possible for the object ball to move even if you shoot away from it - for example, the CB might have been the only thing keeping the OB from rolling into a dent in the cloth.

If the shooter is clearly aiming inside or along the tangent line, <font color="red">and his tip placement is such that the CB won't squirt away from the OB</font color>, and if the OB does visibly move, I'll generally call it fair.

SpiderMan

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr> This question has been bothering me for a while. I was in a hill/hill eight ball match and my opponent wound up with the cueball frozen to one of his last object balls. I thought I had the match from there.

He pushed the cueball straight off the object ball to the rail and I had no shot. I called a foul and he said no it wasn't because the object "rocked". Well, it may have. It certainly didn't move from the spot it was on. I didn't see it do anything. The guy was the US Amateur Champion so I figured he knew more than me and I let it go. I lost the match because of it.

The rules seem to indicate that I was right. What do you guys think? <hr /></blockquote>

Deeman3
12-20-2005, 12:30 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SpiderMan:</font><hr> On perfect equipment, if the object ball moved, then he must have shot ever so slightly into it, ie he "hit" it.

On bad equipment, it's possible for the object ball to move even if you shoot away from it - for example, the CB might have been the only thing keeping the OB from rolling into a dent in the cloth. <font color="blue"> Spiderman, that's what Ii was trying to say above but couldn't get it across. Maybe bad descriptive skills. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Deeman</font color>

If the shooter is clearly aiming inside or along the tangent line, <font color="red">and his tip placement is such that the CB won't squirt away from the OB</font color>, and if the OB does visibly move, I'll generally call it fair.

SpiderMan

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Chopstick:</font><hr> This question has been bothering me for a while. I was in a hill/hill eight ball match and my opponent wound up with the cueball frozen to one of his last object balls. I thought I had the match from there.

He pushed the cueball straight off the object ball to the rail and I had no shot. I called a foul and he said no it wasn't because the object "rocked". Well, it may have. It certainly didn't move from the spot it was on. I didn't see it do anything. The guy was the US Amateur Champion so I figured he knew more than me and I let it go. I lost the match because of it.

The rules seem to indicate that I was right. What do you guys think? <hr /></blockquote> <hr /></blockquote>

wolfdancer
12-20-2005, 04:36 PM
I once lost out on a ref's rulling on this....I know that I
"pushed in" slightly, enough to wobble the ball....but the ref wanted to see it move some.
After the match....I showed him the same shot and he apologised
My understanding in snooker is that it is a foul if you move the ball????