PDA

View Full Version : One-Pocket



03-23-2002, 06:55 PM
I hope I explain this right so that I can get an opinion. Your shooting at your pocket. There is an object ball close to the pocket. The cue ball is in the pack in front of a ball to which it is frozen. On the forward stroke your shaft rubs on top of the ball to which the cue ball is frozen then you make contact with the cue ball and pocket the object ball. You're gambling but did not make this a scratch before the game. Is this a foul?

03-23-2002, 07:02 PM
It is the option of your opponent to decide if he wants to move the the ball you grazed or leave it where it lies. I believe if you are not playing foul on all balls, then you should continue shooting. my $.02

Troy
03-23-2002, 07:29 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: TheShot:</font><hr> It is the option of your opponent to decide if he wants to move the the ball you grazed or leave it where it lies. I believe if you are not playing foul on all balls, then you should continue shooting. my $.02 <hr></blockquote>

I agree..... /ccboard/images/icons/smile.gif

Tom_In_Cincy
03-24-2002, 12:14 AM
If the ball you put in motion does not come into play (cross paths with the cue ball or any ob, then it would be a foul) then the non-shooting player has the option to place it back to it original position or leave it where it lies. But, it is still your turn. NO FOUL, unless you are playing NON- cue ball only foul.

heater451
03-24-2002, 01:19 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: TheShot:</font><hr> It is the option of your opponent to decide if he wants to move the the ball you grazed or leave it where it lies. I believe if you are not playing foul on all balls, then you should continue shooting. my $.02 <hr></blockquote>

But, wouldn't the foul be incurred, because the shooter completed the shot (apparently accidentally) without stopping to offer the option?

Troy
03-24-2002, 01:33 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: heater451:</font><hr> &lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote: TheShot:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr&gt; It is the option of your opponent to decide if he wants to move the the ball you grazed or leave it where it lies. I believe if you are not playing foul on all balls, then you should continue shooting. my $.02 &lt;hr&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

But, wouldn't the foul be incurred, because the shooter completed the shot (apparently accidentally) without stopping to offer the option?
<hr></blockquote>

I got the impression that the "touch" occurred with the shot. If I'm correct, it would be difficult to stop.

03-24-2002, 02:09 PM
pretty sure you guys are right; no foul.

i did have some fun with this one about a year ago. set the shot up for richard rhorer who wrote a lot of the bca rule book. shooting over another ball i hit the interposing ball with the cue tip then completed by hitting the c.b. and making the shot.

richard rules: yep, it's a foul. i handed him the latest edition book and about a half hour later he came back with the revised opinion: no foul. seems like it should be but it ain't.

dan

03-24-2002, 07:12 PM
Again, not to be rude but what gives the BCA the right to make One Pocket rules? To my knowledge they've never had even a board member who plays the game.

cueball1950
03-24-2002, 09:12 PM
GRADY,,, JUST ANSWER THE MANS QUESTION WITHOUT GOING ON ABOUT THE BCA,,IT IS REALLY GETTING ANNOYING,,SOMEONE ASKS A QUESTION AND YOU DO NOT ANSWER IT, YET YOU TAKE THE TIME TO BASH SOMEBODY,,,,,EITHER ASNSWER THE QUESTION OR DO NOT REPLY,,,VERY SIMPLE..............MIKE

03-24-2002, 09:13 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Grady Mathews:</font><hr> Again, not to be rude but what gives the BCA the right to make One Pocket rules? To my knowledge they've never had even a board member who plays the game. <hr></blockquote>

c'mon, grady. what are we going to do, have a different set of rules for each game from a different source? at the end of the day, they set the rules because they are the ones who publish the 'generally accepted' book. just like hoyle for poker. were i to play you, (fat chance) then what rules would we play by?

by the way, the matter seems to more of a "general" rule than something specific to 1-hole.


dan

03-24-2002, 10:37 PM
When I was growing up and playing 1-hole. we played that touching an OB with anything but the QB was a foul. I feel the QB foul only rule is for real amateurs.

Tom_In_Cincy
03-24-2002, 10:42 PM
Gardy,
Your persistance seems to be drumming up replies. I wonder when more people will start asking why the BCA is the the ruling King? There is nothing that the BCA does for pool that APA, VNEA, Regional Tours, WPBA, TAP and lots of locally run leagues do much more and more often.

Even the BCA Trade show is not what it use to be, Valley Forge and the West Coast trade shows are becoming more and more the choice for the manufacturers.

Why is there a BCA? The Olympics? maybe.. but then again there is already a US Olympic committe and they will have something to say about who they accept. Did anyone read in this month BD, the BCA's changes to the ruling body.. they had to add two more player (athletes) before they can be recognized.

Tom_In_Cincy
03-24-2002, 10:46 PM
I agree, but what I don't miss is the arguments that the touch ball foul would generate, even between gentlemen friends.

The 14.1 league here, has cue ball fould only. And, its a same that when a brige is used, and and accidental raking occurs, that the only thing you can do is put the balls back to where you think they should go, or play them as they are.

TomBrooklyn
03-25-2002, 04:39 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote: Grady Mathews:</font><hr> ...what gives the BCA the right to make One Pocket rules? To my knowledge they've never had even a board member who plays the game. <hr></blockquote>The BCA has as much right to make general and game specific rules as anyone else. Any other organization or individual also has an equal right to make rules.

So what makes the BCA rules so special? Any set of rules are only as valuable as the extent to which they are accepted. The extent to which such an organization is accepted is generally dependent on how well respected it is, how much influence they exert on the game, and the existance or non-existance of competing organizations that are more or less widely known and respected. The BCA rules tend to be widely accepted because of it's size and that they publish. This makes it easy for everyone to get on the same page. It also depends largely on which sancioning body the best players sign up with.

There are other sports that have had disputes with the major sanctioning/rule setting body. There are many example in sports of competing organizations that have sprung up. How successful they have been varies. Sometimes they merge and become one body. Take the American Football Leauge which started around the early sixties. They started as a seperate and competing leauge to the National Football League. The AFL attracted many good players. The NFL agreed to play the AFL at the end of the season and they self-designated it as the World Championship. This game became an annual event and later became known as the Super Bowl. Then the AFL and NFL merged under one umbrella. (or maybe they merged prior to the super bowl games.)

Take a look at boxing. There was one major sanctioning body. Some had disagreements with it. Two other groups formed, and then there were three major sanctioning bodies with three different "World Champions" Some champions held the belt in two or all of the bodies, some didn't.

Who sets the rules for pool or any other sport or game is not set in stone. It is merely a matter of which sanctioning body achieves the most respect and widespread acceptance.

Q-guy
03-25-2002, 08:44 AM
You can't really compare the BCA trade show and Valley Forge. The BCA show is for the trades. You are not even supposed to be there if you are not in the business. The Valley Forge show is for the public and gives mostly cuemakers a chance to show their wares to everyday people. I would like to see the BCA show do something a little more like Valley Forge as far as having tournaments along with the show but it will never happen. They want all the focus on the show and buying.

03-25-2002, 09:19 AM
I sent the two proposals to do tournaments at their trade show. They weren't interested at all.
As far as bash them goes, Mike you haven't been discriminated against like I have by them.Easy for you to say.

BillPorter
03-25-2002, 11:02 AM
Grady, someone mentioned to me that you were thinking of putting on some kind of trade show/tournament in the Northern Kentucky area. Any truth to that?

Q-guy
03-25-2002, 06:20 PM
Did you do that straight pool tournament a few years ago in Vegas the same week as the trade show? I think it was at the Tropicana. If I remember right it drew like 15 players. I think the problem was a lot of the players were committed to their sponsors at the show and could not budget the time to play. You don't need their permission to put on a tournament though. Do one the beginning of the week before the show. I am wondering and I mean this, why do feel you can't do a tournament unless it is some kind of spectacular event. What is wrong with doing a manageable tournament where you won't lose money and resent it afterward? Three or four $10,000 added events a year to start would be great plus all the action. It is what you really like, and what a lot of the players and spectators like. I don't get it. I will guarantee I would be there and so will a lot of others. Is something like this anywhere at all rattling around in your mind? Leave cleaning up the sport to someone else. There is room for both kinds of tournaments and players. Wishful thinking I guess.

Q-guy
03-25-2002, 06:28 PM
You can't really play all fouls without referees. Most tournaments today don't use referees. None of the local tours do. It can produce real pettiness that most don't care for. You see incredible pettiness in the leagues. They want to win because you didn't comb you hair right. I never could stand that about the leagues.