PDA

View Full Version : The low hit jump shot



bradb
01-14-2008, 01:38 PM
I was practising power draw with the butt elevated a bit to see just how far i could pull it back when I got so low, the Qball leaped over the Ob on a straight line!... Ah ha!... a light went on! Here's a jump shot that is more accurate than my short stick jump shot. Of course this was a miscue but I wondered if I could control it. I set it up again only with a ball over a pocket and 3 times in a row I was able to pocket the 2nd ball.

The hit is set up just like a power draw only I noticed it works better if you elevate the butt about a foot or more. Hit the Qball about a tip or less above the table surface, it will hop over nicely every time.

One problem is if you hit it too low it will nick the surface. I've heard Mike Seigal say the tip should hit the surface on every shot, so hopefully that is not a problem

I don't know if this shot is legal, it should be as long as you don't scoop it... that is, hit the table surface first.

This seems easier to me then hitting down on the Qball with the short stick.

If anybody knows the shot or have tried it I would be interested in feedback. -brad

BigRigTom
01-14-2008, 01:46 PM
Brad, I am pretty sure that would still be considered a "scoop" shot and would be considered a foul by most rules.
The only legal and proper way (that I know of) to make a jump shot is hitting "down" on the ball and driving it into the table surface then it will bounce back up and over the obstacle ball. Height and distance is achieved by angle and force.

dr_dave
01-14-2008, 01:53 PM
I agree that this type of jump shot is illegal. Although, depending on how "miscue" is defined, it might not be a miscue. See the "scooping jump shot" links under "fouls" here (http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads.html).

Regards,
Dave

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> I was practising power draw with the butt elevated a bit to see just how far i could pull it back when I got so low, the Qball leaped over the Ob on a straight line!... Ah ha!... a light went on! Here's a jump shot that is more accurate than my short stick jump shot. Of course this was a miscue but I wondered if I could control it. I set it up again only with a ball over a pocket and 3 times in a row I was able to pocket the 2nd ball.

The hit is set up just like a power draw only I noticed it works better if you elevate the butt about a foot or more. Hit the Qball about a tip or less above the table surface, it will hop over nicely every time.

One problem is if you hit it too low it will nick the surface. I've heard Mike Seigal say the tip should hit the surface on every shot, so hopefully that is not a problem

I don't know if this shot is legal, it should be as long as you don't scoop it... that is, hit the table surface first.

This seems easier to me then hitting down on the Qball with the short stick.

If anybody knows the shot or have tried it I would be interested in feedback. -brad <hr /></blockquote>

bradb
01-14-2008, 01:53 PM
This is true if it is a scoop shot, but it hits the cue ball first and if the tip does go on through to the surface the Qball has already left, so I'm wondering if its a legal hit.

-brad

Fran Crimi
01-14-2008, 02:04 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> I was practising power draw with the butt elevated a bit to see just how far i could pull it back when I got so low, the Qball leaped over the Ob on a straight line!... Ah ha!... a light went on! Here's a jump shot that is more accurate than my short stick jump shot. Of course this was a miscue but I wondered if I could control it. I set it up again only with a ball over a pocket and 3 times in a row I was able to pocket the 2nd ball.

The hit is set up just like a power draw only I noticed it works better if you elevate the butt about a foot or more. Hit the Qball about a tip or less above the table surface, it will hop over nicely every time.

One problem is if you hit it too low it will nick the surface. I've heard Mike Seigal say the tip should hit the surface on every shot, so hopefully that is not a problem

I don't know if this shot is legal, it should be as long as you don't scoop it... that is, hit the table surface first.

This seems easier to me then hitting down on the Qball with the short stick.

If anybody knows the shot or have tried it I would be interested in feedback. -brad <hr /></blockquote>

Brad, a scoop shot doesn't just mean the tip is hitting the table first. A scoop shot means that the cue ball rides up on the ferrule of the cue stick so that the cue stick is actually scooping the cue ball.

This is why the shooter must shoot down on the cue ball and also strike it at the equator or above --- at least that's my understanding of a legal jump shot.

The shot you described sounds to me like an illegal shot because the cue ball is riding up the ferrule of the cue stick due to the fact of you're striking it on the underside of the equator.

Fran

bradb
01-14-2008, 02:07 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> I agree that this type of jump shot is illegal. Although, depending on how "miscue" is defined, it might not be a miscue. See the "scooping jump shot" links under "fouls" here (http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads.html).

Regards,
Dave

<hr /></blockquote>

I looked it up and its a legal shot under hsv 7.23.

Looks like my shot exactly only the tip is a bit more elevated.

I think I will stick with this shot as it is more accurate for me and it allows me to stay with my regular cue.

bradb
01-14-2008, 02:13 PM
Hi Fran, yes thats true what you say about the scoop shot.

It appears this shot already existed and is legal I just did'nt know about it.


There's nothing new under the sun! There goes my royalties. -brad /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Fran Crimi
01-14-2008, 02:52 PM
Brad, unfortunately, I don't think your shot is legal.

Sorry...
Fran

dr_dave
01-14-2008, 04:15 PM
Fran and others,

Look at the two example scoop shots in HSV A.1 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-1.htm). In the first shot, the tip hits the ball and cloth at close to the same time. There is no apparent "miscue" (depending on how you define "miscue"). There is obviously a single hit and no ferrule contact. So is this a foul? I don't think the current rules are clear on this.

In the second shot, there is an obvious miscue and ferrule contact, so the shot is obviously a foul ("intentional miscue").

I hope Bob can let us know how he thinks the new rules address "scoop shots" (with and without a "miscue").

Regards,
Dave

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> I was practising power draw with the butt elevated a bit to see just how far i could pull it back when I got so low, the Qball leaped over the Ob on a straight line!... Ah ha!... a light went on! Here's a jump shot that is more accurate than my short stick jump shot. Of course this was a miscue but I wondered if I could control it. I set it up again only with a ball over a pocket and 3 times in a row I was able to pocket the 2nd ball.

The hit is set up just like a power draw only I noticed it works better if you elevate the butt about a foot or more. Hit the Qball about a tip or less above the table surface, it will hop over nicely every time.

One problem is if you hit it too low it will nick the surface. I've heard Mike Seigal say the tip should hit the surface on every shot, so hopefully that is not a problem

I don't know if this shot is legal, it should be as long as you don't scoop it... that is, hit the table surface first.

This seems easier to me then hitting down on the Qball with the short stick.

If anybody knows the shot or have tried it I would be interested in feedback. -brad <hr /></blockquote>

Brad, a scoop shot doesn't just mean the tip is hitting the table first. A scoop shot means that the cue ball rides up on the ferrule of the cue stick so that the cue stick is actually scooping the cue ball.

This is why the shooter must shoot down on the cue ball and also strike it at the equator or above --- at least that's my understanding of a legal jump shot.

The shot you described sounds to me like an illegal shot because the cue ball is riding up the ferrule of the cue stick due to the fact of you're striking it on the underside of the equator.

Fran <hr /></blockquote>

dr_dave
01-14-2008, 04:28 PM
I think all "scoop" jump shots are supposed to be illegal, but I haven't checked the details in the existing or new rules. Hopefully, Bob can fill us in.

Dave

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> I agree that this type of jump shot is illegal. Although, depending on how "miscue" is defined, it might not be a miscue. See the "scooping jump shot" links under "fouls" here (http://billiards.colostate.edu/threads.html).

Regards,
Dave

<hr /></blockquote>

I looked it up and its a legal shot under hsv 7.23.

Looks like my shot exactly only the tip is a bit more elevated.

I think I will stick with this shot as it is more accurate for me and it allows me to stay with my regular cue. <hr /></blockquote>

SKennedy
01-14-2008, 05:00 PM
Where I come from that's a scoop shot all day long. And yes, they are easier and more accurate than a legit jump shot. Now, you can take advantage of players who don't know the difference between scooping and jumping....assuming your conscious will let you.

bradb
01-14-2008, 05:38 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SKennedy:</font><hr> Where I come from that's a scoop shot all day long. And yes, they are easier and more accurate than a legit jump shot. Now, you can take advantage of players who don't know the difference between scooping and jumping....assuming your conscious will let you. <hr /></blockquote>

Are you looking at HSV 7.23? Do you think that video is illegal?

bataisbest
01-14-2008, 05:59 PM
O.K. Let's see. If I'm trying to draw the cue ball and miscue- meaning you can actually hear and see that it was a legitimate attempt at draw- and I contact and/ or make the object ball accidentally, is that considered a good hit and or legal shot? I've had this happen a few times during matches and have always been given the benefit of the doubt. I likewise , have given my opponent the same consideration given he was trying to make a normal shot, not trying to jump over another ball or anything like that. It is an akward situation when you're trying to make a regular shot and something weird like this happens.

dr_dave
01-14-2008, 06:01 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote SKennedy:</font><hr> Where I come from that's a scoop shot all day long. And yes, they are easier and more accurate than a legit jump shot. Now, you can take advantage of players who don't know the difference between scooping and jumping....assuming your conscious will let you.<hr /></blockquote>

Are you looking at HSV 7.23? Do you think that video is illegal?<hr /></blockquote>Why do you think anybody would suspect HSV 7.23 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/HSV7-23.htm) is illegal? It obviously isn't a scoop shot (in real time or in super slow motion).

Regards,
Dave

dr_dave
01-14-2008, 06:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bataisbest:</font><hr> O.K. Let's see. If I'm trying to draw the cue ball and miscue- meaning you can actually hear and see that it was a legitimate attempt at draw- and I contact and/ or make the object ball accidentally, is that considered a good hit and or legal shot?<hr /></blockquote>Yes, because it was not an intentional miscue.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bataisbest:</font><hr>I've had this happen a few times during matches and have always been given the benefit of the doubt. I likewise , have given my opponent the same consideration given he was trying to make a normal shot, not trying to jump over another ball or anything like that. It is an akward situation when you're trying to make a regular shot and something weird like this happens.<hr /></blockquote>Sounds good to me.

Regards,
Dave

bradb
01-14-2008, 06:23 PM
Are you looking at HSV 7.23? Do you think that video is illegal?<hr /></blockquote>Why do you think anybody would suspect HSV 7.23 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/HSV7-23.htm) is illegal? It obviously isn't a scoop shot (in real time or in super slow motion).

Regards,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

I did'nt... Steve questioned it... that is if he looked at it. -brad /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Bob_Jewett
01-14-2008, 06:34 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> ... Hopefully, Bob can fill us in. ... <hr /></blockquote>
The new Rules and Regulations are now available on the WPA website. It is www.wpa-pool.com. (http://www.wpa-pool.com.) See in particular section 8 of the Rules which is definitions.

A scoop shot (as it is defined there) is considered to be a miscue, and does not necessarily involve contact of the ferrule or shaft with the cue ball. An intentional miscue will be penalized as unsportsmanlike conduct. The penalty for USLC can include ejection from the tournament with forfeiture of all prizes and ranking points or it might just be a warning.

av84fun
01-14-2008, 06:39 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> I was practising power draw with the butt elevated a bit to see just how far i could pull it back when I got so low, the Qball leaped over the Ob on a straight line!... Ah ha!... a light went on! Here's a jump shot that is more accurate than my short stick jump shot. Of course this was a miscue but I wondered if I could control it. I set it up again only with a ball over a pocket and 3 times in a row I was able to pocket the 2nd ball.

The hit is set up just like a power draw only I noticed it works better if you elevate the butt about a foot or more. Hit the Qball about a tip or less above the table surface, it will hop over nicely every time.

One problem is if you hit it too low it will nick the surface. I've heard Mike Seigal say the tip should hit the surface on every shot, so hopefully that is not a problem

I don't know if this shot is legal, it should be as long as you don't scoop it... that is, hit the table surface first.

This seems easier to me then hitting down on the Qball with the short stick.

If anybody knows the shot or have tried it I would be interested in feedback. -brad <hr /></blockquote>

Brad, the shot is illegal by virtue of your own description of it as a miscue.

Here are the World Standard Rules.

3.26 ILLEGAL JUMPING OF BALL
It is a foul if a player strikes the cue ball below center (“digs under” or “lofts” the cue ball) and intentionally causes it to rise off the bed of the table in an effort to clear an obstructing ball. Such jumping action may occasionally occur accidentally, and such “jumps” are not to be considered fouls on their face; they may still be ruled foul strokes, if for example, the ferrule or cue shaft makes contact with the cue ball in the course of the shot.

3.27 JUMP SHOTS
Unless otherwise stated in rules for a specific game it is legal to cause the cue ball to rise off the bed of the table by elevating the cue stick on the shot, and forcing the cue ball to rebound from the bed of the table. Any miscue when executing a jump shot is a foul.


The rule is poorly worded in that it requires the hit to be above center...when it should state "horizontal center."

What I mean is that there is a horizontal center AND the center viewed from the angle at which the cue is approaching the CB.

In other words, if you were viewing the CB from directly above, the centerline would intersect the top of the ball.

But it is clear that the rule means the horizontal center so any jump shot struck below that point would be a foul...miscure or not.

Having said that, the rule is not strictly enforced. I see jump shots all the time in pro matches where the player "cheats" below the horizontal center but doing so does not create a miscue.

In any event, the shot you describe is clearly a foul by rule.

Regards,
Jim

bradb
01-14-2008, 06:56 PM
In reply to Av84fun:

The first time i hit the shot described it was a miscue, however I elevated the cue enough to eliminate the feral hit and the shot looks excatly like the shot Dave shows in his video with less elevation...the butt being about a foot from the table.
From what I hear from Bob, its perfectly legal. -brad

pooltchr
01-14-2008, 08:26 PM
I can't get the video to play, but the answer, based on what Bob said seems fairly simple. If you are shooting a jump shot, and strike the cue ball below the horizontal center to do so, it's a foul. The only legal jump shot is one that is played shooting down on the cue ball so the tip makes contact above the horizontal center and drives the cue ball toward the playing surface of the table.

A mis-cue when attempting extreme draw that results in the cue ball jumping up is not necessarily a foul, but it is very likely that it would be, due to the ferrule contacting the cue ball.

If you aim below center(horizontal) with the intent of jumping another ball, it's a foul.

Steve

Bob_Jewett
01-14-2008, 09:08 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr> ...
3.26 ILLEGAL JUMPING OF BALL
... <hr /></blockquote>
There is no Rule 3.26 in the current WSR.

av84fun
01-14-2008, 09:20 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> In reply to Av84fun:

The first time i hit the shot described it was a miscue, however I elevated the cue enough to eliminate the feral hit and the shot looks excatly like the shot Dave shows in his video with less elevation...the butt being about a foot from the table.
From what I hear from Bob, its perfectly legal. -brad <hr /></blockquote>

The rules published by the BCA and those by the World Pool-Billiard Association, although they bear the same effective date (1-8-08) are different and contain different subject numbers.

The BCA rules are those I cited above. I have no idea what relationship there is, if any, between the BCA and the WPBA. Certainly Bob knows all about that. However, having read the New Standard Rules twice...I may be having a senior moment but I could find no reference to any text defining the jump shot or rules surrounding its use.

Bob???

Having said that, if you go the the BCA web site and click on their rules, you will see that for a jump shot to be legal the tip must strike the CB above center...persumably the horizontal center, and if a miscue results in attempting a jump shot, it is a foul.

Of course, all BCA events would be governed by its own rules. Other organizations can adopt their own rules but if they simply say that BCA rules will govern then your shot, as described would be a foul...miscue or not.

Regards,
Jim

SKennedy
01-14-2008, 09:31 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr>

Are you looking at HSV 7.23? Do you think that video is illegal?<hr /></blockquote>Why do you think anybody would suspect HSV 7.23 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/HSV7-23.htm) is illegal? It obviously isn't a scoop shot (in real time or in super slow motion).

Regards,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

I did'nt... Steve questioned it... that is if he looked at it. -brad /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif <hr /></blockquote>

No, I didn't. I think HSV 7.23 is legal. I was refering to those where one hits the bottom of the ball and the tip is lifting the ball. Really doesn't matter if tip hits ball first, or at same time as cloth, or ferrule, etc. If you have to use slow motion to determine those things it will/should be considered a foul. HSV 7.23 shows the tip hitting the top 1/2 of the ball and the ball is being driven into the cloth making it jump, as opposed to scooping or lifting the ball with the tip. Not saying I'm right or wrong..just letting you know how most players in this area would react or interpret your shot.

Fran Crimi
01-14-2008, 09:39 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Fran and others,

Look at the two example scoop shots in HSV A.1 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-1.htm). In the first shot, the tip hits the ball and cloth at close to the same time. There is no apparent "miscue" (depending on how you define "miscue"). There is obviously a single hit and no ferrule contact. So is this a foul? I don't think the current rules are clear on this.

In the second shot, there is an obvious miscue and ferrule contact, so the shot is obviously a foul ("intentional miscue").

I hope Bob can let us know how he thinks the new rules address "scoop shots" (with and without a "miscue").

Regards,
Dave

<hr /></blockquote>

Good examples, Dave. I'm sure it's impossible to tell if the ball is riding up on the ferrule or not in those shots without high speed video. I honestly don't know what's going to happen now in calling jump shot fouls.

At least before, while the rule was admittedly imperfect, it was based on either what the naked eye could discern or basic logic---which in the case of jump shots, it is highly likely that if the ball is struck below the equator, the cue ball will ride up onto the ferrule.

Until we can do high speed video instant replay at every table for every match, we have to be a little more general with some rules, if applicable, even if it does mean being less than perfect.

Fran

bataisbest
01-14-2008, 09:44 PM
Great. Thanks for the clarification.

Fran Crimi
01-14-2008, 09:56 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote bradb:</font><hr> In reply to Av84fun:

The first time i hit the shot described it was a miscue, however I elevated the cue enough to eliminate the feral hit and the shot looks excatly like the shot Dave shows in his video with less elevation...the butt being about a foot from the table.
From what I hear from Bob, its perfectly legal. -brad <hr /></blockquote>

The rules published by the BCA and those by the World Pool-Billiard Association, although they bear the same effective date (1-8-08) are different and contain different subject numbers.

The BCA rules are those I cited above. I have no idea what relationship there is, if any, between the BCA and the WPBA. Certainly Bob knows all about that. However, having read the New Standard Rules twice...I may be having a senior moment but I could find no reference to any text defining the jump shot or rules surrounding its use.

Bob???

Having said that, if you go the the BCA web site and click on their rules, you will see that for a jump shot to be legal the tip must strike the CB above center...persumably the horizontal center, and if a miscue results in attempting a jump shot, it is a foul.

Of course, all BCA events would be governed by its own rules. Other organizations can adopt their own rules but if they simply say that BCA rules will govern then your shot, as described would be a foul...miscue or not.

Regards,
Jim <hr /></blockquote>

I'm not sure which BCA you're referring to. The BCA Pool League is not the BCA. The BCA site has been under maintenance all weekend so I haven't been able to check the rules. I just tried again and I still can't access the site. However, if they are still showing the old version of World Standardized Rules, then the new version will be up shortly.

The BCA Pool League has their own set of rules for their league players.

Fran

dr_dave
01-14-2008, 10:36 PM
Thanks Bob. I just found this in Section 8.18:
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote new WPA Rules:</font><hr>"A scoop shot, in which the cue tip contacts the playing surface and the cue ball at the same time and this causes the cue ball to rise off the cloth, is treated like a miscue."<hr /></blockquote>
So the first shot in HSV A.1 (http://billiards.colostate.edu/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-1.htm) is now clearly a foul.

Thank you for adding that clarification to the rules. This was not clear in the previous version.

Regards,
Dave
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> ... Hopefully, Bob can fill us in. ... <hr /></blockquote>
The new Rules and Regulations are now available on the WPA website. It is www.wpa-pool.com. (http://www.wpa-pool.com.) See in particular section 8 of the Rules which is definitions.

A scoop shot (as it is defined there) is considered to be a miscue, and does not necessarily involve contact of the ferrule or shaft with the cue ball. An intentional miscue will be penalized as unsportsmanlike conduct. The penalty for USLC can include ejection from the tournament with forfeiture of all prizes and ranking points or it might just be a warning. <hr /></blockquote>

dr_dave
01-14-2008, 10:53 PM
Fran,

I'm with you on this one. I just think the rules should be clearer with this sort of thing. For example: a scoop jump shot, where the cue ball is lifted up from the table surface, is a foul. With a legal jump shot, the cue tip must drive the cue ball down into the table. (or something like that.) Per my reply to Bob (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=271418&amp;page =0&amp;view=collapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=&amp;vc=1), it looks like the new rules are clear enough on this topic (Thanks to Bob's efforts).

Regards,
Dave
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Fran and others,

Look at the two example scoop shots in HSV A.1 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-1.htm). In the first shot, the tip hits the ball and cloth at close to the same time. There is no apparent "miscue" (depending on how you define "miscue"). There is obviously a single hit and no ferrule contact. So is this a foul? I don't think the current rules are clear on this.

In the second shot, there is an obvious miscue and ferrule contact, so the shot is obviously a foul ("intentional miscue").

I hope Bob can let us know how he thinks the new rules address "scoop shots" (with and without a "miscue").

Regards,
Dave

<hr /></blockquote>

Good examples, Dave. I'm sure it's impossible to tell if the ball is riding up on the ferrule or not in those shots without high speed video. I honestly don't know what's going to happen now in calling jump shot fouls.

At least before, while the rule was admittedly imperfect, it was based on either what the naked eye could discern or basic logic---which in the case of jump shots, it is highly likely that if the ball is struck below the equator, the cue ball will ride up onto the ferrule.

Until we can do high speed video instant replay at every table for every match, we have to be a little more general with some rules, if applicable, even if it does mean being less than perfect.

Fran<hr /></blockquote>

mantis
01-14-2008, 10:57 PM
Brad,

I am not sure why you are arguing this so strongly. This is obviously a foul. It always has been. You can not shoot under the center of the cue ball to jump it. I do not mean to sound to harsh, but you seem set on the idea that is a legal shot no matter what anyone says. I for one am terrible at jumping the ball correctly, so it would be great if this was actually legal. Oh well.

dr_dave
01-14-2008, 10:58 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mantis:</font><hr> Brad,

I am not sure why you are arguing this so strongly. This is obviously a foul. It always has been. You can not shoot under the center of the cue ball to jump it. I do not mean to sound to harsh, but you seem set on the idea that is a legal shot no matter what anyone says. I for one am terrible at jumping the ball correctly, so it would be great if this was actually legal. Oh well. <hr /></blockquote>I think most people knew this, but it wasn't clear the way the old rules were written.

Regards,
Dave

Fran Crimi
01-15-2008, 12:16 AM
<font color="blue"> This is not written for people like me. </font color>

8.18 Miscue
A miscue occurs when the cue tip slides off the cue ball possibly due to a contact that is too eccentric or to insufficient chalk on the tip. It is usually accompanied by a sharp sound and evidenced by a discoloration of the tip. Although some miscues involve contact of the side of the cue stick with the cue ball, unless such contact is clearly visible, it is assumed not to have occurred. A scoop shot, in which the cue tip contacts the playing surface and the cue ball at the same time and this causes the cue ball to rise off the cloth, is treated like a miscue. Note that intentional miscues are covered by 6.16 Unsportsmanlike Conduct (c).

<font color="blue"> I've been in this game for more than a few decades now, and this is the first time I've ever heard of "a contact that is too eccentric". I'm picturing a player shooting while wearing a blue wig or somthing like that. How about all those things that have to be clearly visible in order to exist? How can you tell with the naked eye if the tip struck the ball and the cloth at the same time? Is it really practical to put that on a player who has all of one second to observe the action? </font color>

Fran

Bob_Jewett
01-15-2008, 12:49 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mantis:</font><hr> ... You can not shoot under the center of the cue ball to jump it. ... <hr /></blockquote>
While this may have been the literal wording of the rules at one time, it was never really enforced. It has always been possible to hit a draw shot with elevation and get the cue ball to jump. Sometimes the tip hits the cue ball below the equator on such a shot. I think it was never the intent of the rules writers to forbid such a shot, and enforcement would be nearly impossible.

av84fun
01-15-2008, 12:50 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr> ...
3.26 ILLEGAL JUMPING OF BALL
... <hr /></blockquote>
There is no Rule 3.26 in the current WSR. <hr /></blockquote>

Right. Those are the Rules published currently on the BCA web site and to which they claim copyright. The numbering convention is entirely different as you point out. But they do specifically define the jump shot and the rules relating thereto. I could find no such rules in the new WSR.

Regards,
Jim
http://www.bca-pool.com/play/tournaments/rules/pdf/BCAGeneralRules.pdf

Fran Crimi
01-15-2008, 08:37 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote mantis:</font><hr> ... You can not shoot under the center of the cue ball to jump it. ... <hr /></blockquote>
While this may have been the literal wording of the rules at one time, it was never really enforced. It has always been possible to hit a draw shot with elevation and get the cue ball to jump. Sometimes the tip hits the cue ball below the equator on such a shot. I think it was never the intent of the rules writers to forbid such a shot, and enforcement would be nearly impossible. <hr /></blockquote>

The real point is that concept of not shooting below center was something players could relate to and was easily understood. The players I've known over the years have all tried to strike the cb at the equator line or above and have most likely avoided illegal hits because of it. Now you will have players shooting low on shots claiming that the shot is legal, when it most likely isn't, with no way to determine otherwise with the naked eye.

Fran

dr_dave
01-15-2008, 08:56 AM
Fran,

I agree that "too eccentric" might be a little obtuse for some. Maybe "too far off center" would have been better. However, no matter how you write it, some people won't understand or might misinterpret it. For example, some people don't understand what center-ball means when the cue is elevated. So instead, maybe the phrase should be "when the line through the center of the cue stick points too far below the center of the cue ball for the given cue elevation." At some point, you just have to write it as simple as possible to make the intent clear. I think Bob and the WPA committee have done a very good job overall. The new rules are certainly much better (clearer, with less room for misinterpretation) than the previous version.

Regards,
Dave

PS: I prefer "too far off center"

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> <font color="blue"> This is not written for people like me. </font color>

8.18 Miscue
A miscue occurs when the cue tip slides off the cue ball possibly due to a contact that is too eccentric or to insufficient chalk on the tip. It is usually accompanied by a sharp sound and evidenced by a discoloration of the tip. Although some miscues involve contact of the side of the cue stick with the cue ball, unless such contact is clearly visible, it is assumed not to have occurred. A scoop shot, in which the cue tip contacts the playing surface and the cue ball at the same time and this causes the cue ball to rise off the cloth, is treated like a miscue. Note that intentional miscues are covered by 6.16 Unsportsmanlike Conduct (c).

<font color="blue"> I've been in this game for more than a few decades now, and this is the first time I've ever heard of "a contact that is too eccentric". I'm picturing a player shooting while wearing a blue wig or somthing like that. How about all those things that have to be clearly visible in order to exist? How can you tell with the naked eye if the tip struck the ball and the cloth at the same time? Is it really practical to put that on a player who has all of one second to observe the action? </font color>

Fran <hr /></blockquote>

Fran Crimi
01-15-2008, 09:09 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Fran,

I agree that "too eccentric" might be a little obtuse for some. Maybe "too far off center" would have been better. However, no matter how you write it, some people won't understand or might misinterpret it. For example, some people don't understand what center-ball means when the cue is elevated. So instead, maybe the phrase should be "when the line through the center of the cue stick points too far below the center of the cue ball for the given cue elevation." At some point, you just have to write it as simple as possible to make the intent clear. I think Bob and the WPA committee have done a very good job overall. The new rules are certainly much better (clearer, with less room for misinterpretation) than the previous version.

Regards,
Dave

PS: I prefer "too far off center"

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> <font color="blue"> This is not written for people like me. </font color>

8.18 Miscue
A miscue occurs when the cue tip slides off the cue ball possibly due to a contact that is too eccentric or to insufficient chalk on the tip. It is usually accompanied by a sharp sound and evidenced by a discoloration of the tip. Although some miscues involve contact of the side of the cue stick with the cue ball, unless such contact is clearly visible, it is assumed not to have occurred. A scoop shot, in which the cue tip contacts the playing surface and the cue ball at the same time and this causes the cue ball to rise off the cloth, is treated like a miscue. Note that intentional miscues are covered by 6.16 Unsportsmanlike Conduct (c).

<font color="blue"> I've been in this game for more than a few decades now, and this is the first time I've ever heard of "a contact that is too eccentric". I'm picturing a player shooting while wearing a blue wig or somthing like that. How about all those things that have to be clearly visible in order to exist? How can you tell with the naked eye if the tip struck the ball and the cloth at the same time? Is it really practical to put that on a player who has all of one second to observe the action? </font color>

Fran <hr /></blockquote> <hr /></blockquote>

I could be wrong, Dave, but I doubt it could be put any simpler than to say that you must shoot down at the ball and make contact above the equator line of the cue ball in order for a jump shot to be legal.

I agree that many of the new rules made certain things clearer, however, there is a point at which too much information starts to have diminishing returns because it leads to too many questions that can't be answered on the spot.

Having access to high speed videos is great, but in writing rules, you have to consider that no one will be replaying the shots in slow motion to determine if certain criteria has been met.

Fran

av84fun
01-15-2008, 11:18 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> <font color="blue"> This is not written for people like me. </font color>

8.18 Miscue
A miscue occurs when the cue tip slides off the cue ball possibly due to a contact that is too eccentric or to insufficient chalk on the tip. It is usually accompanied by a sharp sound and evidenced by a discoloration of the tip. Although some miscues involve contact of the side of the cue stick with the cue ball, unless such contact is clearly visible, it is assumed not to have occurred. A scoop shot, in which the cue tip contacts the playing surface and the cue ball at the same time and this causes the cue ball to rise off the cloth, is treated like a miscue. Note that intentional miscues are covered by 6.16 Unsportsmanlike Conduct (c).

<font color="blue"> I've been in this game for more than a few decades now, and this is the first time I've ever heard of "a contact that is too eccentric". I'm picturing a player shooting while wearing a blue wig or somthing like that. How about all those things that have to be clearly visible in order to exist? How can you tell with the naked eye if the tip struck the ball and the cloth at the same time? Is it really practical to put that on a player who has all of one second to observe the action? </font color>

Fran <hr /></blockquote>

LOL Fran. I agree with you. There should be at least one plumber on every rule writing committee!!
(-:

SPetty
01-15-2008, 11:43 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr>I see jump shots all the time in pro matches where the player "cheats" below the horizontal center but doing so does not create a miscue.<hr /></blockquote>I believe I see that all the time, too, and not just in pro matches. And I believe that's the shot that bradb is describing.

I asked someone about it once, and they suggested that the player is not really hitting below the equator because they physically cannot do that when the cue is elevated for a jump shot. That almost makes sense, except that it still looks like they're hitting below the equator...

av84fun
01-15-2008, 12:30 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SPetty:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote av84fun:</font><hr>I see jump shots all the time in pro matches where the player "cheats" below the horizontal center but doing so does not create a miscue.<hr /></blockquote>I believe I see that all the time, too, and not just in pro matches. And I believe that's the shot that bradb is describing.

I asked someone about it once, and they suggested that the player is not really hitting below the equator because they physically cannot do that when the cue is elevated for a jump shot. That almost makes sense, except that it still looks like they're hitting below the equator...
<hr /></blockquote>

No, hitting below the horizontal equater is not at all impossible. Place the 1 ball so that the 1 is lying horizontally. The centerline of the #1 is at the equater.

Jack up and you will see that it is not difficult to hit below that line. Note that the upper portion of the tip is what will make contact, not the lower portion.

And guess what! You get a scoop jump. However, you should get a MUCH higher loft on the CB shooting legally since when striking more toward the center of mass will cause more force to be applied to the CB and due to Newton's Law, you will be a greater rebound off the slate.

Having said all that, I agree with your friend that shots actually struck above the equater LOOK like they are struck below it.

In any event, since the jump shot is so controversial, it is disappointing that the new WSRs don't address that shot more clearly. So I guess that in tournaments, it would be a GREAT idea to determine from the TD what jump shot rules will be imposed in each tournament.

Regards,
Jim

dr_dave
01-15-2008, 01:58 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr>I could be wrong, Dave, but I doubt it could be put any simpler than to say that you must shoot down at the ball and make contact above the equator line of the cue ball in order for a jump shot to be legal.<hr /></blockquote>What about a small draw jump with fairly low cue elevation? It is fairly easy to get a legal jump hitting below the "equator." By "equator," I assume you mean the horizontal equator, and not the equator as viewed from the shooter's elevated perspective. I still like the intent of my statement better: a scoop jump shot, where the cue ball is lifted up from the table surface, is a foul. With a legal jump shot, the cue tip must drive the cue ball down into the table.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr>I agree that many of the new rules made certain things clearer, however, there is a point at which too much information starts to have diminishing returns because it leads to too many questions that can't be answered on the spot.<hr /></blockquote>Rule writing is a difficult job. You can't please everybody, and there will always be "opportunities for improvement." I have great appreciation for the people who are willing to deal with the tedium and constant abuse.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr>Having access to high speed videos is great, but in writing rules, you have to consider that no one will be replaying the shots in slow motion to determine if certain criteria has been met.<hr /></blockquote>Fran, I didn't expect high-speed video cameras to be used during rule enforcement. The video examples are just helpful in understanding how to write the rules properly.

Regards,
Dave

Bob_Jewett
01-15-2008, 02:07 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> ... I could be wrong, Dave, but I doubt it could be put any simpler than to say that you must shoot down at the ball and make contact above the equator line of the cue ball in order for a jump shot to be legal.
... <hr /></blockquote>
How are you going to determine whether the player hit above or below the equator on a jump shot? The only way I know of is to use high-speed video because a lot of players don't hit where the address the ball.

I think we first have to agree on which shots should be outlawed. I think those are miscue jump shots and scoop jump shots (where "scoop" is defined as in the current rules). Are we at least in agreement on that?

bradb
01-15-2008, 02:37 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> ... I could be wrong, Dave, but I doubt it could be put any simpler than to say that you must shoot down at the ball and make contact above the equator line of the cue ball in order for a jump shot to be legal.
... <hr /></blockquote>
How are you going to determine whether the player hit above or below the equator on a jump shot? The only way I know of is to use high-speed video because a lot of players don't hit where the address the ball.

I think we first have to agree on which shots should be outlawed. I think those are miscue jump shots and scoop jump shots (where "scoop" is defined as in the current rules). Are we at least in agreement on that? <hr /></blockquote>

Bob and others:

Yipes, quite a lot has gone down since I've been away. I took the time and read all the posts and it seems there is a problem on determining exactly where the ball is hit on this shot.

I can honestly say that I started this shot as a miscue attempting a power draw, but I saw that by elevating the cue the same shot appears to act just like a regular jump shot. I aim below the equator of the Qball and the ball hops cleanly without hitting the ferrule and leaves the surface without a double hit, and it certainly does not ride up the shaft as I understand a scoop shot to be, nor does the cue tip hit the surface.

Even though I may be aiming below the equator the tip may in fact be actually right on it, or swiping across it. Only a high speed camera could tell.

I will say that it looks just exactly like the video only the hit is from a less steep angle. I went back and examined the video closely and it looks to me that the tip hits right at the equator and swipes down it similar to my shot.

If hitting the ball below the equator is illegal then I will of course back off my claim that it is legal but if the video is legal then is mine? Its a question of how far does the swipe go below the equator.

I can see the problem with trying to write a rule for this shot as no referee could possibly determine it to be legal other than to make a judgement call based on the angle of the que stick.

Personnally (coming from a snooker background) I hate the jump shot and would like to see it banned. But its a crowd pleaser and pool needs all the help it can get. -brad

Fran Crimi
01-15-2008, 03:45 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> ... I could be wrong, Dave, but I doubt it could be put any simpler than to say that you must shoot down at the ball and make contact above the equator line of the cue ball in order for a jump shot to be legal.
... <hr /></blockquote>
How are you going to determine whether the player hit above or below the equator on a jump shot? The only way I know of is to use high-speed video because a lot of players don't hit where the address the ball.

I think we first have to agree on which shots should be outlawed. I think those are miscue jump shots and scoop jump shots (where "scoop" is defined as in the current rules). Are we at least in agreement on that? <hr /></blockquote>

As I wrote before, the earlier description of not striking the ball below the equator line was imperfect. However, the tradeoff was that it was easily understood by the players. Even in this thread you can see how players immediately responded with the comment that a jump shot must be struck above the equator line. I was one of them.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if some players strayed slightly below the line, however, it wouldn't have been significantly low enough to cause concern regarding whether or not the shot was legal---and that's the whole point of the rule.

As for a scoop shot, no, I don't agree that the visual criteria set should be that the tip strikes the ball and the table at the same time. How does one determine that with the naked eye on a shot that happens so fast?

Sometimes you almost have to forget that you've even looked at some high speed video shots for verification of certain principles, so that you can focus more on what the players are capable and not capable of observing right as the action is taking place.

Fran

Bob_Jewett
01-15-2008, 04:57 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> ... Sometimes you almost have to forget that you've even looked at some high speed video shots for verification of certain principles, so that you can focus more on what the players are capable and not capable of observing right as the action is taking place.

Fran <hr /></blockquote>
I think video is an important tool to understand what is actually going on during shots. I didn't realize before seeing it that most (but not all) miscues involve contact with the ferrule, for example. It is important for the rules to match reality.

I think we first have to agree on which shots should be outlawed. I think those are miscue jump shots and scoop jump shots (where "scoop" is defined as in the current rules). Are we at least in agreement on that?

Bob_Jewett
01-15-2008, 05:03 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> ... miscue jump shots and scoop jump shots (where "scoop" is defined as in the current rules).... <hr /></blockquote>
The scoop shot, as defined in the current rules, needs to be included as a special case since it does not involve a miscue. This is a shot that very few people know, although they might play it by accident from time to time. I read about it a long time ago in one of Joe Davis's books, but didn't understand the technique. It was Dr. Dave who pointed out the (possible) lack of miscue on the shot and the reason you can get a controlled jump with the technique.

bradb
01-15-2008, 06:17 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mantis:</font><hr> Brad,

I am not sure why you are arguing this so strongly. This is obviously a foul. It always has been. You can not shoot under the center of the cue ball to jump it. I do not mean to sound to harsh, but you seem set on the idea that is a legal shot no matter what anyone says. I for one am terrible at jumping the ball correctly, so it would be great if this was actually legal. Oh well. <hr /></blockquote>

As I mentioned in a previous thread, the shot I am trying is almost identical to the video of Daves low hit jump shot. On close examination of this shot it appears the que tip is hitting right on the center line and swiping slightly past it. What I am saying is the shot I described does the same. I realize the rules say below the line is a foul.
So even though I am aiming at the bottom, I think I am probably hitting about the same or slightly below the center and that was my observation.

Apologies if my wording appeared as if I was adament on defending it, I was'nt. -brad

Fran Crimi
01-15-2008, 07:17 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I think video is an important tool to understand what is actually going on during shots. I didn't realize before seeing it that most (but not all) miscues involve contact with the ferrule, for example. It is important for the rules to match reality.

I think we first have to agree on which shots should be outlawed. I think those are miscue jump shots and scoop jump shots (where "scoop" is defined as in the current rules). Are we at least in agreement on that?

Bob Jewett
<hr /></blockquote>

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> ... miscue jump shots and scoop jump shots (where "scoop" is defined as in the current rules).... <hr /></blockquote>
The scoop shot, as defined in the current rules, needs to be included as a special case since it does not involve a miscue. This is a shot that very few people know, although they might play it by accident from time to time. I read about it a long time ago in one of Joe Davis's books, but didn't understand the technique. It was Dr. Dave who pointed out the (possible) lack of miscue on the shot and the reason you can get a controlled jump with the technique. <hr /></blockquote>

Bob, with all due respect, I've already said that I don't agree with your definition of a scoop shot because I think that your definition is not practical, not because it's wrong. How can you expect a player or a referee to make a call based on something they can't see, such as the tip striking the ball and cloth at the same time?

You've admitted that your frame of reference for that definition was a high speed video shot. I don't know how many more ways I can say that that criteria you've set is beyond what the naked eye can see in the brief moment that the action takes place. I ask you again...How can you expect a player or a referee to declare a shot a scoop shot if they can't see if the tip strikes the ball and cloth at the same time?

Fran

av84fun
01-15-2008, 10:56 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> ... I could be wrong, Dave, but I doubt it could be put any simpler than to say that you must shoot down at the ball and make contact above the equator line of the cue ball in order for a jump shot to be legal.
... <hr /></blockquote>
How are you going to determine whether the player hit above or below the equator on a jump shot? The only way I know of is to use high-speed video because a lot of players don't hit where the address the ball. <hr /></blockquote>

Bob, there are numerous judgment calls in pool. Good hits, for example, are often only callable based on the direction of departure of the two object balls.

Double taps also can often not be detectable and are only called based on cb/ob behavior after the stroke.

But as I pointed out in an earlier post, while striking below the equater with a jacked up cue is not impossible, neither is is simple and would be obvious if attempted...at least to a ref who took up a proper vantage point.

However, fortunately for the integrity of the game, there is a rapidly diminishing return to players striking the CB much below the equater adjusted for the angle of approach of the cue.

Striking the cb at or below the horizontal equater will not produce anywhere near the cb launch angle of a jump shot struck at or slightly below the adjusted equater.

Regards,
Jim

dr_dave
01-16-2008, 10:59 AM
Wow! I'm glad I'm not one of the guys writing the rules! /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Dave

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr><blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr>I think video is an important tool to understand what is actually going on during shots. I didn't realize before seeing it that most (but not all) miscues involve contact with the ferrule, for example. It is important for the rules to match reality.

I think we first have to agree on which shots should be outlawed. I think those are miscue jump shots and scoop jump shots (where "scoop" is defined as in the current rules). Are we at least in agreement on that?<hr /></blockquote>
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> ... miscue jump shots and scoop jump shots (where "scoop" is defined as in the current rules)....

The scoop shot, as defined in the current rules, needs to be included as a special case since it does not involve a miscue. This is a shot that very few people know, although they might play it by accident from time to time. I read about it a long time ago in one of Joe Davis's books, but didn't understand the technique. It was Dr. Dave who pointed out the (possible) lack of miscue on the shot and the reason you can get a controlled jump with the technique.<hr /></blockquote>
Bob, with all due respect, I've already said that I don't agree with your definition of a scoop shot because I think that your definition is not practical, not because it's wrong. How can you expect a player or a referee to make a call based on something they can't see, such as the tip striking the ball and cloth at the same time?

You've admitted that your frame of reference for that definition was a high speed video shot. I don't know how many more ways I can say that that criteria you've set is beyond what the naked eye can see in the brief moment that the action takes place. I ask you again...How can you expect a player or a referee to declare a shot a scoop shot if they can't see if the tip strikes the ball and cloth at the same time?<hr /></blockquote>

bradb
01-16-2008, 11:13 AM
Sorry all for the confusion.....

I went back and read my first post and I realized my description of hitting it about a tip above the surface was where I had first mis cued and was not where I was hitting it later. I should have corrected that.

Sorry for misdirecting in my copy and I can see that I had described an obvious scoop shot.

The shot where i was successful is almost identical to Daves video. I had inadvertently found my way to that same shot by trial and error.

After doing this again and again, (my table has more marks than a measles victim) I am deffinately managing to hit the QB slightly below the equator.
-brad

dr_dave
01-16-2008, 11:28 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Bob_Jewett:</font><hr> ... miscue jump shots and scoop jump shots (where "scoop" is defined as in the current rules).... <hr /></blockquote>
The scoop shot, as defined in the current rules, needs to be included as a special case since it does not involve a miscue. This is a shot that very few people know, although they might play it by accident from time to time. I read about it a long time ago in one of Joe Davis's books, but didn't understand the technique. It was Dr. Dave who pointed out the (possible) lack of miscue on the shot and the reason you can get a controlled jump with the technique. <hr /></blockquote>Bob,

What is the rationale for making a scoop shot illegal? It seems to meet all of the requirements for a legal shot. Is it too easy? Is it more likely to lead to cloth damage than other "legal shots" (masse, jump, break with cue bend)? Does the jump-cue industry have a large contingent on the rules committee?

Seriously,
Dave

Fran Crimi
01-16-2008, 12:02 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Wow! I'm glad I'm not one of the guys writing the rules! /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Dave
<hr /></blockquote>


Relax, Dave. The rules are a done deal. They've been voted on and approved. Bob doesn't have to answer any of my questions or respond to any of my comments if he doesn't want to. I hope that in 5 years when they come up again for adjustments and corrections, that we will be able to address these issues.

So for now, have a great 5 years enjoying the rules!

Fran

dr_dave
01-16-2008, 12:09 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr><blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>Wow! I'm glad I'm not one of the guys writing the rules! /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif<hr /></blockquote>
Relax, Dave. The rules are a done deal. They've been voted on and approved. Bob doesn't have to answer any of my questions if he doesn't want to. I hope that in 5 years when they come up again for adjustments and corrections, that we will be able to address these issues.

So for now, have a great 5 years enjoying the rules!<hr /></blockquote>Why are you telling me to relax when you are the one giving Bob a hard time? /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

The reason I'm glad I'm not Bob is I don't even get questions about rules, much less need (or want) to address them (now or 5 years from now).

Very Relaxed,
Dave

Fran Crimi
01-16-2008, 12:26 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr><blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr>Wow! I'm glad I'm not one of the guys writing the rules! /ccboard/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif<hr /></blockquote>
Relax, Dave. The rules are a done deal. They've been voted on and approved. Bob doesn't have to answer any of my questions if he doesn't want to. I hope that in 5 years when they come up again for adjustments and corrections, that we will be able to address these issues.

So for now, have a great 5 years enjoying the rules!<hr /></blockquote>Why are you telling me to relax when you are the one giving Bob a hard time? /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

The reason I'm glad I'm not Bob is I don't even get questions about rules, much less need (or want) to address them (now or 5 years from now).

Very Relaxed,
Dave <hr /></blockquote>

You call it a 'hard time' because you don't like what I'm saying here, because Bob relied on some of your videos in helping form his definitions. I know how this works, Dave. I expect that you will defend him.

I don't see anyone else jumping in saying I'm out of line or that I'm wrong in disagreeing with the definition of a scoop shot. My points are practical and clear and if someone were to provide an answer that made sense I would be most happy to yield to that answer. I would appreciate your not trying to inject emotionally charged comments such as, Wow I'm sure glad I'm not one of the rule writers.....

Thanks in advance,
Fran

dr_dave
01-16-2008, 12:41 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr>You call it a 'hard time' because you don't like what I'm saying here, because Bob relied on some of your videos in helping form his definitions. I know how this works, Dave. I expect that you will defend him.<hr /></blockquote>No comment (per one of my New Year's resolutions). Peace.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr>I don't see anyone else jumping in saying I'm out of line or that I'm wrong in disagreeing with the definition of a scoop shot. My points are practical and clear and if someone were to provide an answer that made sense I would be most happy to yield to that answer. Until then I would appreciate your not trying to inject emotional comments such as "Boy I'm sure glad I'm not the rule writer.....<hr /></blockquote>Fran,

I agree with you 100% that the rules should be written clearly, have as little room for misinterpretation as possible, and be easy to apply in a practical way. I was just suggesting that this is a very difficult job and Bob and others deserve thanks for their efforts. The rules are now much better than they were (IMO). Rules can always be improved. I'm glad you and others are giving Bob things to think about for the next round. I just think it can be done with more mutual respect and appreciation. I apologize if my sense of your "tone" was wrong. The only thing harder than writing good rules is understanding personalities and emotional intent in these sometimes-frustrating online forums.

Regards with respect,
Dave

PS: I know we both have lots of "emotional baggage" from past "interactions" on this forum. I hope we can both try to be more respectful and tolerant of each other in this new year.

Bob_Jewett
01-16-2008, 12:55 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> ... Bob,

What is the rationale for making a scoop shot illegal? It seems to meet all of the requirements for a legal shot. ... <hr /></blockquote>
In the new rule set, the "bad" kind of jump shot was outlawed by making intentional miscues illegal. It is difficult to distinguish between a miscue jump and a scoop jump. Making them both illegal simplifies the referee's task. If a player intentionally jumps with a level stick, the shot is clearly a foul.

Ralph_Kramden
01-16-2008, 01:23 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Fran and others,

Look at the two example scoop shots in HSV A.1 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-1.htm). In the first shot, the tip hits the ball and cloth at close to the same time. There is no apparent "miscue" (depending on how you define "miscue"). There is obviously a single hit and no ferrule contact. So is this a foul? I don't think the current rules are clear on this.

In the second shot, there is an obvious miscue and ferrule contact, so the shot is obviously a foul ("intentional miscue").

I hope Bob can let us know how he thinks the new rules address "scoop shots" (with and without a "miscue").

Regards,
Dave
-------------------------------------------------------------------

In the video HSV A.1 does the cuetip come in contact with both the ball and the table at the same moment at anytime in either of the shots shown?

The first shot seems like the cuetip contacts the table and the ball simaltaneously. In the second shot the cuetip comes in at steeper angle, hits the ball first and delects downward to the table making contact with both the table and ball at the same time.

I would think that to get that height on an illegal scoop the cuetip would have to get pinched between the ball and the table. If the cueball could "ride up the ferrule" it would already be higher than the width of the cuetip.

I think any ball scooped in this manner would leave a chalk mark on the cloth where the tip contacts it. A bridge hand that is not SOLID under the shaft would let the cuetip deflect downward to hit the cloth.

If you form a bridge and someone pushes down on the cuetip it should have resistance from going downward. You must have bone under the stick... not one that feels like mush.

dr_dave
01-16-2008, 02:26 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ralph_Kramden:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote dr_dave:</font><hr> Fran and others,

Look at the two example scoop shots in HSV A.1 (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/high_speed_videos/new/HSVA-1.htm). In the first shot, the tip hits the ball and cloth at close to the same time. There is no apparent "miscue" (depending on how you define "miscue"). There is obviously a single hit and no ferrule contact. So is this a foul? I don't think the current rules are clear on this.

In the second shot, there is an obvious miscue and ferrule contact, so the shot is obviously a foul ("intentional miscue").

I hope Bob can let us know how he thinks the new rules address "scoop shots" (with and without a "miscue").<hr /></blockquote>
In the video HSV A.1 does the cuetip come in contact with both the ball and the table at the same moment at anytime in either of the shots shown?<hr /></blockquote>Yes, in both shots.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ralph_Kramden:</font><hr>The first shot seems like the cuetip contacts the table and the ball simaltaneously.<hr /></blockquote>Agreed, after a brief contact with the ball alone first (I think).

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ralph_Kramden:</font><hr>In the second shot the cuetip comes in at steeper angle, hits the ball first and delects downward to the table making contact with both the table and ball at the same time.<hr /></blockquote>Agreed.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ralph_Kramden:</font><hr>I would think that to get that height on an illegal scoop the cuetip would have to get pinched between the ball and the table.<hr /></blockquote>Agreed.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ralph_Kramden:</font><hr>If the cueball could "ride up the ferrule" it would already be higher than the width of the cuetip.<hr /></blockquote>The ball doesn't need to ride up the ferrule to get good jump action. Actually, I don't think there is ferrule contact in either shot (there certainly doesn't need to be). When the tip hits the table, the table supports the shaft end, allowing the tip to provide upward force to lift the ball.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ralph_Kramden:</font><hr>I think any ball scooped in this manner would leave a chalk mark on the cloth where the tip contacts it.<hr /></blockquote>Agreed (provided there is chalk on the tip).

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ralph_Kramden:</font><hr>A bridge hand that is not SOLID under the shaft would let the cuetip deflect downward to hit the cloth.<hr /></blockquote>Even with a solid bridge, the cue deflects easily.

Regards,
Dave

Fran Crimi
01-17-2008, 11:17 AM
<font color="blue"> No baggage, Dave. Just truth. </font color>


[quote Dr. Dave:] I hope Bob can let us know how he thinks the new rules address "scoop shots" (with and without a "miscue").
Regards,
Dave
<hr /></blockquote>


[quote Bob Jewett:] The scoop shot, as defined in the current rules, needs to be included as a special case since it does not involve a miscue. This is a shot that very few people know, although they might play it by accident from time to time. I read about it a long time ago in one of Joe Davis's books, but didn't understand the technique. It was Dr. Dave who pointed out the (possible) lack of miscue on the shot and the reason you can get a controlled jump with the technique.
<hr /></blockquote>

dr_dave
01-17-2008, 11:29 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr>No baggage, Dave. Just truth.<hr /></blockquote>Then I promise to try to do my best to help create a new "truth" (respect, tolerance, understanding, appreciation, etc.) when communicating with you in the future. I hope you will do the same.

Sincerely,
Dave

PS: I appreciate all of your postings on this forum. I honestly look forward to reading the insights and perspectives you often offer. I hope you don't take this in any way but sincerely.