This may seem obvious, but if the cue ball is "frozen" to one of your opponents' group of balls, and when you shoot, the opponent's object ball moves, is that a foul?
It just seems to me that I didn't actually "hit" it in my turn, because the cue ball was ALREADY touching it!
- billiardsforum on 11/25/2006 10:44:55 PM
Ahh, this is my crux too, I absolutely HATE those shots because they make you jack up your cue stick so awkwardly. Anyway, the 8-ball rules don't specify anything on this, so per BCA protocol, we fall back on the general rules of pocket billiards, which state:
_This regulation applies to any shot where the cue ball’s first contact with a ball is with one that is frozen to a cushion or to the cue ball itself. After the cue ball makes contact with the frozen object ball, the shot must result in either:
- The cue ball contacting a cushion
- Another object ball being caused to contact a cushion with which it was not already in contact.
- The frozen ball being caused to contact a cushion attached to a separate rail
- A ball being pocketed
Failure to satisfy one of those four requirements is cause for a foul._
- pinches24 on 11/27/2006 5:27:42 PM
@billiardsforum, that didn't really answer my question.
I read your (and the BCA's) requirements for it NOT being a foul, but that all applies if the (object) ball that the cue ball is frozen to is one of MY group of object balls.
My question was: if the cue ball is frozen to one the OPPONENT'S group of balls, and the opponent's ball(s) move when you take your shot, is it a foul?
Yes, I agree that (obviously) if the cue ball was not touching their object ball and it moves, then I would have HIT it first.
But if the cue ball is ALREADY touching it (frozen to it) and it moves even slightly, is that considered hitting it?
After making their object ball that the cue was frozen to move ever so slightly, the cue ball then strikes one of MY group and drives it to a rail; Or into a pocket.
- billiardsforum on 11/27/2006 8:51:04 PM
Sorry about that, I misread the message. Here's what I came up with;
Your shot as described is a foul unless the movement was caused before your shot was completed. (As in during the set-up to the shot.)
There are no specific official regulations on this whole scenario at the moment, however, I'm waiting for a reply from the both the AMA and the BCA.
Some folks play "all ball fouls" meaning that if they touch any ball accidentally, they are automatically assessed a foul. This not common though, and is usually only exercised in tournaments. Even when it is, it is played as such where the player could concievably and reasonable be suspected of moving a ball in an attempt to cheat when there is prize money at steak..
On the other, more popular hand, is "cue ball fouls only." This means that if you accidentally touch the cue ball (and only the cue ball) with anything (your cue stick, your hand, the chalk, etc) it is a foul. But, if you are setting up to a shot and accidentally move another ball, other than the cue ball, it is not a foul. Also, if you cause a ball to move, you have to allow your opponent to put it back exactly where it was.
So if an object ball was frozen to the cue ball, and you accidentally made it move slightly while setting up to the shot, or taking the shot, then you must allow your opponent to put it back before you complete the shot.
In your case I think you are refering to movement once the shot stroke has been completed right? In that case, it would definitely be a foul.
- jana on 11/27/2006 10:37:20 PM
What you have described, pinches24, is a foul no matter what the circumstances of the lay of the balls, and no matter whether the movement is inevitable. In this case, it is just unfortunate for the shooting player who is in this situation.
Possibly there because the opponent purposely left the cue ball so close that it is now frozen. This type of thing is common in defensive billiard play.
- billiardsforum on 1/6/2007 1:47:51 AM
Some more insight on this from some friends...
- From J.R. - "It's foul no matter the movement is inevitable or not. Either way, how does one determine between "inevitable movement" and "regular movement."
- Rich - Agrees with @jana and says: "I am not sure how inevitable movement would be possible without some a defect in the cloth, table, or ball. I'd think this is a foul."
- M says: "If you shoot away from the object ball, and don't touch it with your cue, hand, or any other object, the object ball will not move under ideal billiard playing conditions. Therefore, there is no way you could call a foul."
- Ginger on 1/6/2007 1:56:37 AM
Hmmm... I've got some problems with that.
Sure...billiard table conditions may not be "ideal" but both billiard players are subject to the pool table's conditions, whether good or bad.
For example... My cue ball is 2 diamonds above the side pocket 1/2" off the left rail. My object ball is 1/4 diamond below the side pocket also 1/2" from the left rail. I shoot the cue ball at a reduced speed and hit the object ball with a direct hit that is straight on. The object ball travels straight and true until it reaches the area which is 1 diamond from the corner pocket and then begins to veer off to the right and stops on the pocket corner.
Each and every billiard player and spectator sees me ball veer to the right and miss the pocket.
We all know that this is NOT counted as a pocketed ball, right? After all, everybody saw the object ball miss the pocket and everybody knows the table caused the ball to veer and miss the pocket.
Ahaha, that is some heavy thinking for a late Saturday night.
- Ross on 1/6/2007 2:02:00 AM
Sorry Ginger, your example is totally different since players can know that the billiard table is not level and make the appropriate adjustments. You can still make the shot if you shoot the ball harder or "play the lean."
Ever hear of "house roll" before?
In the case of object ball and the cue ball being frozen together, there is nothing one can do to prevent the object ball from rolling once you hit the cue ball.
- kellystick on 8/1/2007 1:37:48 PM
IT's a foul. PERIOD.
Here's a new shot to learn.
Leave your opponent with the CB frozen to one of your balls! Thus, this can actually be a skill defense. One should not have special allowances to get free of a skill defence (even if the defence was by accident). Just because the ball is frozen does not mean you MUST make contact with his ball first. You have to aim away from it. That means your options are limited but they are not zero. In defence, that is what it is all about (Control), table management). If you shoot to hide the CB behind your balls to limit your opponent then this is no different. Except if you actually freeze the CB then you have even more limited your opponent, caused him to potentially jack up to shoot over your ball etc. Thus your opponent is penalized for your skill at defence. As it SHOULD be.