PDA

View Full Version : Last night at our local tournament



DebraLiStarr
07-19-2003, 07:26 PM
Last night a situation occurred at a local 8 ball tournament.

Player 1 is playing player 2, 1 game of 8 ball, BCA Rules.

Player 1 misses and leaves a pretty easy run of the table for player 2.

Player 2 plays painfully slow and deliberate, and player 1 (out of view of player 2) unscrews his cue, believing that the game/match was over.

Player 2 uncharacteristically misses an easy shot on the 15 ball in the side pocket.

Player 1 screws his cue together and proceeds to look over the lay of the table.

While this is occurring, a bystander (not a tournament director) tells player 2 about player 1 unscrewing his cue. Player 2 is a BCA Certified instructor and referee. He takes his cue and sweeps the remaining balls that are on the table and tells player 1 that he forfeited.

This started an big argument. Player 1 contended that nobody called the foul on him and the fact that player 2 swept the balls, that player 2 had committed a foul.

The guy running the tournament reccommended that they play the game over, which after 20 minutes of screaming, finally happened, with player 1 (the guy who initially unscrewed his cue)prevailing.

My question is, that if someone unscrews their cue during a match, is this an automatic forfeit of game, or should a tournament official be notified and make a decision? Is this a case where if a tournament official did not call a foul, that the foul never happened? My personal opinion is that the bystander should have minded their own business, as they had been eliminated from the tournament already. This is a weekly bar box tournament with a good pay out, and this match would have guarranteed the winner third place money, or $50.

Steve Lipsky
07-19-2003, 07:42 PM
Hi Debra. It's a tough call. The intent of the rule, obviously, is to prevent sharking. In this example, Player 2 was not sharked when he missed; he simply missed.

Add to this that a bystander called the foul, and it just gets tougher.

My inclination would be that the foul should stand, because Player 1 broke the cue and that is all that is necesary for the rule to go into effect. I don't think the opposing player needs to be the first person to call the foul for it to be one.

That said, regardless of whether the foul stands or not, Player 1 is out of line. Who still unscrews his cue without conceding, in this day and age of standardized rules and such?

- Steve

TheFish
07-20-2003, 06:39 PM
Disagree with above.

Obviously we all understand the gesture of unscrewing the cue as some form of resignation but it happens so much in tournamnets - ESPECIALLY LOCAL or SMALL tournaments.

IF indeed he had resigned then at least one of two things should haev occured
1) Player 1 should have just formally thrown the game away (like swiping at the balls :P hehe)
2) Player 2 should have stopped playing.

Obviously neither happened. If indeed player 1 had given up the game by unscrewing then why was player 2 still playing? Sure you could argue that he was not in the sight of player 1 but if that nosy guy (i find that guy quite annoying) was assy enough to tell player 2 AFTER he missed..then obviously he noticed it before..and should have commented beforehand.



OK..here is the best example about a rule infraction.

If you get a ball in hand..but u arent paying attention to it.and u go back to the table and shoot the ball from where it is..u do not get the ball in hand back..whether it was yours in the first place or not.

Steve Lipsky
07-20-2003, 08:27 PM
Fish,

You make some good points but I don't buy the argument about small/local tournaments. If they're not going to play by the rules, whatever, but you can't use the size or locality of the tournament as a justification.

Are you arguing that sharking should be allowed in a local tournament?

There is no other way to explain the breaking of a cue. It is done to shark. Does the player really need to save the 10 seconds of time, by unscrewing before the game is over? If he does, why is he playing in a pool tournament, and not getting his life in order?

- Steve

Alfie
07-20-2003, 09:30 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DebraLiStarr:</font><hr> Last night a situation occurred at a local 8 ball tournament.

Player 1 is playing player 2, 1 game of 8 ball, BCA Rules.

Player 1 misses and leaves a pretty easy run of the table for player 2.

Player 2 plays painfully slow and deliberate, and player 1 (out of view of player 2) unscrews his cue, believing that the game/match was over.

Player 2 uncharacteristically misses an easy shot on the 15 ball in the side pocket.

Player 1 screws his cue together and proceeds to look over the lay of the table.

While this is occurring, a bystander (not a tournament director) tells player 2 about player 1 unscrewing his cue. Player 2 is a BCA Certified instructor and referee. He takes his cue and sweeps the remaining balls that are on the table and tells player 1 that he forfeited.

This started an big argument. Player 1 contended that nobody called the foul on him and the fact that player 2 swept the balls, that player 2 had committed a foul.

The guy running the tournament reccommended that they play the game over, which after 20 minutes of screaming, finally happened, with player 1 (the guy who initially unscrewed his cue)prevailing.

My question is, that if someone unscrews their cue during a match, is this an automatic forfeit of game, or should a tournament official be notified and make a decision? Is this a case where if a tournament official did not call a foul, that the foul never happened? My personal opinion is that the bystander should have minded their own business, as they had been eliminated from the tournament already. This is a weekly bar box tournament with a good pay out, and this match would have guarranteed the winner third place money, or $50. <hr /></blockquote>That's quite a mess, by Jove!

Ken
07-21-2003, 08:13 AM
Steve, I don't see how it can be sharking if the shooter did not see it. Apparently he also did not see the cue being screwed together. He did not call the concession and the cue was back together without his knowledge so even though technically a concession occurred, I think it was too late to call it.

A spectator can't call a foul and even though there might be no doubt it occurred if the player admits doing it, it's too late to enforce the rule.


If the spectator had not seen it there would have been no problem. The spectator shouldn't be permitted to cause a problem. There should be no communication with the spectators that might affect the match. If the spectator had pointed out the unscrewing before the cue was reassembled would player no. 2 have received illegal assistance and be subject to a penalty for unsportmanlike conduct under rule 2-23? It could be he was in violation under the circumstances outlined here except it was too late to call the concession so the shooter is guilty of unsportmanlike conduct by sweeping up the balls under 2.19, loss of game.
KenCT

Steve Lipsky
07-21-2003, 11:06 AM
Well, you are right of course. It is just that I am against any rule that will let a player get away with being an idiot.

He unscrewed, he should lose. You are right that according to the rules, he probably doesn't. But this sickens me.

- Steve

Buzzsaw
07-21-2003, 12:28 PM
I believe the intent of the foul is inconsequential. Player 1 conceded the match if he unscrewed his cue. While it's probably asking too much, but, there should be a little honor within our sport. I had a situation, in a tournament, where my opponent was shooting the wrong ball and a spectator yelled from the audience to correct him. Of course you don't always have the luxury of having a referee at hand so it became my word against his. The guy I was playing should have stepped up and been a "sport" about it and conceded the game but didn't. Just like this other person my opponent went on to make the remaining balls to win, not only the game but the match as well. Our sport will never progress if we maintain the "win at all cost" mentality we have today.

KBuck
07-21-2003, 12:37 PM
I'm just curious about this. If you unscrew your cue in a tournament where you are not allowed to concede games are you still conceding the match? I believe Karen Corr lost a tournament game once because she conceded the easy 9(current game plus one game foul).

jjinfla
07-21-2003, 04:36 PM
Is this a local bar? If so then the only rules that apply are the rules stated by the bar owner. Forget APA, BCA, Texas Express, WPA, or whatever. They have so many rules where I play if I miss a couple weeks I have to learn them all over. Last night a guy won the 9 on the break pot, but then he didn't win it because he forgot, or didn't know, that we were now playing alternate breaks and not winner or loser breaks anymore. And this guy is the alternate TD when the owner not around. Unscrewing a cue is not loss of game here and of course the few guys who do it are trying to shark someone. And last night the owner put the old bar box cueballs on the tables and I swear I will never play there again with those concrete rocks. Sure do mess up a guys game. Which is the stated intent by the owner. Supposedly to give the weaker players a better chance. But what's a guy to do when it's the only game in town and usually easy money? Jake

The Watchdog
07-21-2003, 05:11 PM
Unfortunately, this is competitiveness at its worst, but it displays the emotional ties that make this game great. The rule in question, I believe, is intended in the spirit of the game. For a concession to occur, it must be obvious that such is taking place.

Much like a hanging ball that drops. The key factor is the perception of whether the shot was over or not. If the perception is that the shot was over(perhaps shooter walking away, opponent approaching), then the ball is replaced to its original position. If the perception is that the shot is not over, or complete, then the ball stays down. The pivotal ingredient to the correct ruling is Perception.

The same is true in this instance. Was the player unscrewing his cue conceding, or was he immaturely showing his disappointment and resignation in an inappropriate manner, as I am sure many of us readers have done in the past.

I believe the benefit of the doubt goes to the sitting player in a local bar tourney, simply because it stands to reason that this player knows he/she should not concede, but simply let emotion get the best of him. Probably the same for the player missing the easy ball.

This example was 8 ball, but I have always found it interesting that in the specific world standard rules for 9 ball, there is a line that states it to be impossible to concede.

Ken
07-21-2003, 06:44 PM
The penalty regarding unscrewing the cue only applies to a game that would give your opponent the match.

Verbally conceding any other game would probably be considered unsportsmanlike. Penalty would be up to the ref or TD but there should be no effect on the game. The game has to be completed. Of course the shooter could say "thanks, I'll take the next game, too" and scoop up the balls. But since the balls were still in position the game could continue and the shooter might be found unsportsmanlike also.

Karen Corr was playing Keith and scratched when the cue ball went a bit long and went into the corner pocket. She scooped up the 3 or so remaining balls and proceeded to rack the balls. She was penalized an extra game for that. It was not a crucial game and did not cost her the match other than by giving Keith both games. There was probably a good chance of her winning if she had not scratched. Giving the next game just made it harder to win and she didn't.

In that instance Karen conceeded the last few balls because she was disappointed over missing an easy out. That was the first time I had seen anyone claim the extra game and Karen was probably surprised to see it happen. Since then I have seen it happen again on the Joss tour and that guy was surprised too.

Conceeding isn't done much on the Joss unless the players know each other well enough to assume the extra game will not be claimed. Sometimes players will conceed nearly every game, however.
KenCT

TomBrooklyn
07-21-2003, 09:16 PM
A lot of people have discussed conceeding. It sounds to me that since Player 1 unscrewed out of sight of Player 2 he was not conceeding, he wanted Player 2 to shoot the rack out. Also, since he did it out of view of Player 2, there is no shark.

Player 2's seems to have disrupted the balls because he knew that after he missed his shot, Player 1 was now likely to win. It was unsportsmanlike. And what gives Player 2 the authority to make the self serving unilateral determination to scramble the balls based on an action that he learned of via hearsay?

It seems in this case that Player 1 admitted to unscrewing. But what if Player 1 refused to admit that he unscrewed his cue? He doesn't have to lie, he merely has to refuse to answer that question if asked. There is no rule forcing him to answer such a question. Player 2 did not see him unscrew and must admit that or lie about it. Now, it comes down to the spectator. Is he authorized to call a foul or make a determination on the game; or is Player 2 authorized to take unilateral action based on a spectator comment?

=TomBk

Tom_In_Cincy
07-21-2003, 09:35 PM
Tom,

So, in a tournament, if you unscrewed your cue (out of my sight, behind my back) while I was on my last few shots of a game, certain that I would win, and I dogged a ball, you would expect me to wait on you to screw your cue back together to continue the game? Knowing you violated a rule?

Now Tom, I know Brooklyn is a little different than Cincy.. but not that much, when it comes to pool rules.

Tell me it aint so Tom.. tell me please

9 Ball Girl
07-22-2003, 07:05 AM
I'm a Brooklyn gal and if someone unscrews their cue while I'm still shooting, that's another bead added to my wins! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Brooklyntucky, Cinci, Corn Country, Hamiltucky, Templetucky--unscrewing your cue during a match is a universal sign that means you've conceded the game.../ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Qtec
07-22-2003, 07:31 AM
/ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Tom, you are wasted in NYC. Get yourself down to Washington . GW could use somebody with your linguistic talent. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

I,m with you on this one . If you dont know your opponent has conceded , then he hasnt conceded.

Maybe the unscrewing [ how far did the unscrewing actually go? ] was some kind of ritual to break his bad luck ?

Q

Fran Crimi
07-22-2003, 07:59 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote 9 Ball Girl:</font><hr> I'm a Brooklyn gal and if someone unscrews their cue while I'm still shooting, that's another bead added to my wins! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Brooklyntucky, Cinci, Corn Country, Hamiltucky, Templetucky--unscrewing your cue during a match is a universal sign that means you've conceded the game.../ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif <hr /></blockquote>

Good for you, Wendy. A bit of trivia here...I invented that rule. You should have seen how it was before. Unbelieveable. Players were unscrewing all over the place. I used to run a lot of local tournaments in NYC and I started making announcements before every tournament that if you unscrew, you concede the match. When I became WPBA Pres., one of the first things I did was add that to our rules. I told other organizations, like the BCA and PPPA (the men's pro association at that time) about the rule and they adopted it as well.

Fran

Steve Lipsky
07-22-2003, 08:46 AM
For those of you who don't believe the match was conceded, because the unscrewing was done out of sight:

According to the original post, the shooter did not miss the 8. He missed the 15. Presumably, he had to shoot at least one more ball to win (maybe more). This at least opens the possibility that the shooter's direction would have changed, seeing the unscrewed cue.

Does this change anyone's opinion?

Am I allowed to unscrew my cue every time my opponent has his back to me? Not to concede, but just to have some fun. Hell, I bet I could unscrew 50 times during the course of one straight pool match, depending on where I am sitting. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

- Steve

Ken
07-22-2003, 09:21 AM
Steve,
I agree that the match was conceeded. I just dispute the finality of that concession. The fact that the shooter was unaware of it gave the player the opportunity to retract his concession.

If we recognize that the intent of the rule is to prevent sharking I have to conclude that sharking did not occur and if the shooter did not see the unscrewed cue he could not claim the match. If he sees it he should go shake hands and then if he wants to continue shooting and misses it doesn't matter. If he sees the unscrewed cue after he misses he should claim the match even though he clearly was not sharked.

My feeling is that the player unscrewing his cue should have agreed that he conceeded, realized that he did a stupid thing and move on to the next game. But it should be his choice whether to do that and not a spectator's.

The unscrewing only counts on a potential match deciding game so you are not in jeopardy of conceeding if you do it throughout the match.

This is similar to the two foul situation. You must inform your opponent and he must acknowlege the notification. You can say it and if he doesn't hear it doesn't count. I did that once and was given the game after the next foul although I was prepared to shoot again going for the fourth foul.

The concession needs to be acknowleged by the other player or called by an official in order to become final. However, it's clear that he intended to conceed and should have admitted it before a spectator butted in.

Is a spectator supposed to call fouls as well? They should stay out of the game. Efren may disagree, however. The fans gave him $50,000 at the Challenge of Champions the last time he won. A rule change followed that incident.
KenCT

Wally_in_Cincy
07-22-2003, 10:15 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> ...I invented that rule. You should have seen how it was before. Unbelieveable. Players were unscrewing all over the place.....<hr /></blockquote>

Sorta like the opposite of NBA players /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

Seriously, kudos to you. I like the rule.

RedHell
07-22-2003, 12:42 PM
What about when you need to change your shaft ? Do you need a permission to unscrew your cue ??? /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

Just kidding of course...

It seems clear that the shooter was conceiding the game. It's like if a manager throws the towel and his boxer manage to sneak in a knockout punch at the same time and win by KO. Was it still concieding or because the knockout happend before the towel falls, the manager has the right to take the towel back...

Conceiding is conceiding, if you have sportmanship, you should know when you have decided that you had seen enough !

Steve Lipsky
07-22-2003, 12:59 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote RedHell:</font><hr> What about when you need to change your shaft ? Do you need a permission to unscrew your cue ??? /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

Just kidding of course...<hr /></blockquote>

Actually, Red, there are quite a few tournaments where you DO need to inform your oppponent about a shaft change. It's funny, but that's how seriously this rule is (and should be, IMO) taken.

- Steve

Qtec
07-22-2003, 01:11 PM
So this is all your fault? /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Joking Fran.


Snooker is a gentlemans game , pool isnt.

If you want to change it , you must start with the pro,s . /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Q


[This is what happens when you let women make the rules. Everything masculine has to be taken out of the game. Women dont understand the male 'beating of the chest 'that makes pool what it is !]

Wally_in_Cincy
07-22-2003, 01:33 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote RedHell:</font><hr> What about when you need to change your shaft ? Do you need a permission to unscrew your cue ??? /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

.......<hr /></blockquote>

Yes.

I would wait until it was my turn at the table and then inform my opponent of my intentions.

DSAPOLIS
07-22-2003, 06:08 PM
Unfortunately I also got to witness this "controversy" which was worsened by the attitudes of all involved. First we have a player that clearly had unscrewed his cue, in a gesture of accepting defeat. There was no question about that. The other player could have very easily walked over to the man running the tournament to inform him that the player had conceded the game. Instead, he made a scene out of it. This was mostly his reaction to missing a very easy shot that he would have made 9 out of ten times.

The main problem here was that the player that unscrewed his cue should have been man enough to have fully conceded the game when he unscrewed his cue. I am of the belief that when you unscrew your cue, a handshake should immediatley follow. I am also of the belief that cooler heads prevail. The confusion was called because the other player never called the foul, or reported it. This gentleman is a BCA Certified instructor and has refereed on the national level, and should have known better, and should have acted more maturely. This gentleman has a reputation for being a hot-head and taking things ultra-seriously, even in bar tournaments (In fact, while playing me earlier in the tournament had taken 12 minutes to play a safety... he either wanted to win really bad or he wanted to get his 75 cents worth out of the game...who knows)
The situation just interrupted everybody else from enjoying the atmosphere. I sat in a corner and ignored them, and stayed out of it - and let both know they were idiots when they asked my opinion, and went back to watching the Dodgers and the Cardinals.

TomBrooklyn
07-22-2003, 11:32 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ken:</font><hr> The concession needs to be acknowleged by the other player or called by an official in order to become final. <hr /></blockquote>Agreed and stipulated.

And, unless I'm mistaken, the intent of the unscrewing rule is to prevent disturbing the concentration of the shooter. Exempli gratia, it is similar to the rule in chess that you must move a piece once you touch it and you cannot change the move after you take your hand off it. A chess player begins calculating his next move as soon as he knows yours. To change it is disruptive to his thinking.

While technically, unscrewing may equal conceeding, the fact that the unscrew was pro tempore and absum abesse afui the table and shooter means it did not effect Player 2's physical or mental state. The rescrew was effected without Shooter 2 even realizing it had happened. There was no referee that was aware of a concession. Therefore, there is no prima facia concession. Habeus corpus.

If Player 2 had accepted the concession he cannot clearly continue his runout attempt. Ipso facto, by taking a shot, he indicates a refusal of the concession de jure even if there had been one. Player 1 must now confirm or repeat his concession to make it effective.

Lastly, if Player 2 wanted to scramble the balls, he had to do it before he missed, while it was still his turn. After his miss, he belongs in his chair. He has no right to remain at the table. He therefore forfeits the game for the ball scramble ex post facto.

The most Player 2 could hope for de jure would be restitutio in integrum. A determination of offsetting circumstances that would require the game to be replayed.

= Amicus Curiae
TomBrooklyn=

Wally_in_Cincy
07-23-2003, 06:58 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote TomBrooklyn:</font><hr>
...Therefore, there is no prima facia concession. Habeus corpus.....

= Amicus Curiae
TomBrooklyn= <hr /></blockquote>

Tom, this sounds like el crappo del toro.

/ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

WaltVA
07-23-2003, 09:30 AM
Or, reductio ad absurdum.

Walt in VA