MISCUES … Should the Rules be Changed to Make Them FOULS?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 тра 2024
- Dr. Dave shows with super-slow-motion footage from high-speed video cameras that all miscues (for sidespin, topspin, and bottom-spin shots) involve pushing sliding tip contact and secondary hits. So, should the rules be changed to make all miscue shots fouls? This video addresses this question and offers a recommendation.
Contents:
0:00 - Intro
---- 1:51 - rules
2:53 - Sidespin with No Chalk
3:49 - Topspin with No Chalk
4:39 - Bottom Spin with No Chalk
5:16 - Sidespin with Chalk
6:15 - Highly Elevated and Others with Chalk
7:14 - Wrap Up
---- 7:37 - pros for changing rules
---- 8:21 - cons for changing rules
Supporting Resources:
- miscue limit resource page: billiards.colostate.edu/faq/s...
- miscue foul resource page: billiards.colostate.edu/faq/f...
- scoop shot resource page: billiards.colostate.edu/faq/f...
- rules resource page: billiards.colostate.edu/resou...
- “Venom Shots is Super Slow Motion” playlist: • Venom Shots is Super S...
- Russian UA-cam Channel (askalf76) with example clips: / @askalf76
- “Pool Player Evolution” T-shirt: drdavebilliardtshirts.com/pro...
- “Got English?” T-shirt: drdavebilliardtshirts.com/pro...
Subscribe to Dr. Dave's UA-cam Channel:
ua-cam.com/users/DrDaveBilliar...
Follow Dr. Dave on Facebook:
/ drdavebilliards
Show your Support (click on the donation button at the bottom of this page):
billiards.colostate.edu/
Purchase Dr. Dave's Instructional Videos and Merchandise:
DrDaveBilliards.com/stream/ (stream or download)
DrDaveBilliards.com/ (physical DVDs)
DrDaveBilliards.com/products/... (product info and purchasing advice)
drdavebilliardtshirts.com/ (T-shirts, polos, mugs, posters)
Find Answers to Any Pool Questions:
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/
Look Up Definitions for Pool Terms and Phrases:
billiards.colostate.edu/gloss...
Get Your Pool Diploma:
billiarduniversity.org/
Attend a 3-Day Pool Boot Camp or Take a Private Lesson:
billiarduniversity.org/instru...
drdavebilliards.com/instructi...
Learn More About Dr. Dave:
billiards.colostate.edu/dr-dave
Good Luck With Your Game!!! - Спорт
*Contents:*
0:00 - Intro
---- 1:51 - rules
2:53 - Sidespin with No Chalk
3:49 - Topspin with No Chalk
4:39 - Bottom Spin with No Chalk
5:16 - Sidespin with Chalk
6:15 - Highly Elevated and Others with Chalk
7:14 - Wrap Up
---- 7:37 - pros for changing rules
---- 8:21 - cons for changing rules
*Supporting Resources:*
- miscue limit resource page: billiards.colostate.edu/faq/sidespin/maximum/
- miscue foul resource page: billiards.colostate.edu/faq/foul/miscue/
- scoop shot resource page: billiards.colostate.edu/faq/foul/scoop/
- rules resource page: billiards.colostate.edu/resources/rules/
- “Venom Shots is Super Slow Motion” playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PLH9d4KFY28XvjfavLkmw8nIcWOiDH2GYc.html
- Russian UA-cam Channel (askalf76) with example clips: www.youtube.com/@askalf76
- “Pool Player Evolution” T-shirt: drdavebilliardtshirts.com/product-category/general/pool-player-evolution/
- “Got English?” T-shirt: drdavebilliardtshirts.com/product-category/humor/got-english/
*Subscribe to Dr. Dave's UA-cam Channel:*
ua-cam.com/users/DrDaveBilliards
In many other sports fouls are fouls, regardless of intention. Whenever you bring in an element of intentionality, you introduce the potential both of abuse by a player who cleverly disguises his intention or unfairness by a referee who falsely assumes intention.
Agreed. Judging intention is problematic.
Hello doctor Yes you can certainly hear the difference and I do know the sound well of each
Oh wow, you marked that cue shaft so it's easier to find the pivot angle instead of having to constantly move a ruler back and forth..... Clever 😎
Actually, Pubo marked the shaft so he could accurately measure cue speed from the video. I didn't include that info in my video, but we have the data.
I’m convinced! Definitely need to be careful of the wording, but if ‘close hits’ are highly scrutinized, it seems fair to also scrutinize miscues. Seeing that there are multiple tip contacts and/or ferrule contact in miscues are clear indicators of them being fouls. It’s a slam dunk if the ferrule touches the cue ball, just because it happens quickly, doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen!
I'm glad I was able to convince you. I convinced myself also. :)
Sanjin was talking about this with a referee in one of his matches too because he wanted to be sure that the ref made the right call and make sure the ref knew that miscuing wasn't the actual intention
See my “BAD CALLS in Pro Matches - Unintentional Miscue SCOOP SHOTS” video:
ua-cam.com/video/UOERQUw25DQ/v-deo.html
It's hard enough to convince people about a double hit that just occurred. I can't even imagine how you'd convince any of these old farts who have been playing pool for 900 years that they had secondary contact with the cue during their miscue in an otherwise successful shot. Nevermind that horrible sound during the miscue that is a dead giveaway...Steve the Skill Level 6 who has been playing pool since he was 6 years old in 1852 will not change his ways.
Pretty much every player, even complete novices can tell the difference between a good hit and a miscue.
After your hard work about miscues, all miscues should be ruled as fouls. The fact that rule has been applied for many years should not be a limit for this change.
Nice work Dr. Dave.
Thanks.
I can buy that every miscue is technically a foul. I think the existing rules permit miscues because
- the rules predate high-speed cameras, so people probably assumed (and mostly still do) that it was technically possible to somehow get that weird clack sound, without a double hit.
- the spirit of the rule (I'm guessing) is that we want to prevent someone from tapping the cue ball, which is going to lead to a no-rail foul, and then quickly trying to cover up their foul by double hitting. And we also want to prevent cheaty trick shots like the one where you trap a ball against the rail and slowly rotate it into the pocket. There's also an obscure cheat where you can guide a ball around an obstacle with a double hit.
- and of course to prevent scooping.
Accidental miscues create a foul that is too rapid to see, every time, and for the most part don't violate the spirit or intent of those rules.
To enforce the foul, we're going to require referees to rely on audio evidence, and there's no precedent for that.
Because intent is not that hard to judge, and no advanced player attempts scoop jumps, I feel like the existing rule is good enough as it is. It very often results in a foul anyway, when the cue ball sails over the object ball or deflect so far off course it doesn't touch anything.
Interesting topic though.
ps: please dear god no more circus music
Thank you for your well-stated comments with excellent points.
That circus music is an "ear worm," isn't it.
@@DrDaveBilliards =D
Most miscues generally lead to fouls anyway, miscue are their own fouls lol. On the semi-rare occasion you hit a legal object ball and a rail after miscuing, maybe they should be, but I'd say no reason to change it. Hard to really come to a conclusion. Can we say with certainty that there are double hits on all types of miscue?
I wouldn't say "most" miscues lead to fouls, but "many" do. I have hit many draw shot miscues over the years, where I made the ball anyway. I have also left my opponent safe after a miscue before. I have also hit a ball I didn't intend to (in 8-ball) and made things really tough for my opponent as a result. There is a long list of possible good outcomes with a miscue, especially in 8-ball.
@0:56 you talk about miscues and what causes them. Not chalking properly or hitting too far off center. I often miscue from squeezing too tight on my stroke. I hit the cue ball in the center initially but my grip steers it off the ball causing the miscue. Am I correct about what is happening when I miscue?
Tightening the grip hand (which lowers the tip) is the main cause for miscues, especially with draw shots. For more info, see:
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/draw/advice-and-drills/
Unintentional miscue should not be a foul. It is pretty rare to benefit from a miscue, but no uncommon for honest players to wonder "was that a miscue?" The difference between a miscue and other fouls is one can often warn the opponent to carefully watch a planned sketchy shot.
Good points. Thank you for your opinion.
Great video, had no idea up to 5 secondary contacts could be recorded on video. I agree the WPA double hit or more rule should be all inclusive and remove the word intent. Miscue should be a foul along with a video like yours to explain the new rules. The WPA has referees to make the calls. The sponsors of the pro tournaments have a variety of favorite rules. Some examples are the 9 on the spot brake from the box, racking device, winner break and more. What would stop a sponsors from making a double hit rule?
That's what I thought too, until I saw all the "resistance" on the con side of the argument.
I don’t think it’s news to anyone that miscues are fouls. It’s usually obvious from the sound that multiple strikes are involved.
However, I’d vote for keeping the status quo regarding rules.
The reason is simple - in order to be usable, a rule set must attempt to avoid conflict, judgement calls, and game delays.
In situations where the legality of a shot may be in question, the opponent has the opportunity to call a referee to witness the shot. And while a close call on a “correct ball hit” or “double hit” may require the referee to apply judgement, the decision is final.
Now consider the miscue, whose primary evidence is a sound signature.
With the exception of professional play, most pool games occur in a noisy environment - bars and poolrooms. Even statewide and National BCA and APA tournaments have constant background music, teams cheering, etc. The only person close enough to hear anything other than a blatant miscue is the player at the table. A miscue during a finesse safety will probably be inaudible to an opponent eight feet away in the chair. And if the two players disagree, the decision goes to the shooter.
The only way to enforce the rule would be to have the shot watched, but unlike double hits and wrong-ball-first fouls, THERE IS NO WAY TO ANTICIPATE WHEN A PLAYER IS ABOUT TO MISCUE. This means that a referee would have to watch every shot in every game to enforce the “always a foul” rule.
Excellent point about not knowing when a miscue might occur. I also agree that sound alone is not a reliable indicator, especially in a noisy league setting. If the rule were changed, the call would need to based mostly on the motion of the CB. If the shot is a suspected miscue (maybe from the sound or CB motion) and the CB motion clearly indicates a sliding-tip push or secondary contact, based on the motion being very different from what would be expected for the shot being played, then the shot would be called a foul. As the video clearly shows, the errant CB motion with miscues is due to a sliding-tip push or secondary hits, both of which are fouls.
As always, Dr. Dave is technically correct, explains the concepts clearly, and backs it up with conclusive documentary evidence. However, many relatively skilled players, who should know better, persist in denying double-contact fouls, or remain ignorant of the objective criteria which can be applied, such as observing the speed and direction of the cue ball. Some may fail to correct lower-skilled players on their teams, perhaps for fear of discouraging them. People need to understand the rules before they would support changing them. I think that our focus should be on taking the time to educate all players to the principles involved, rather than risking alienating some by making more shots "illegal." Thanks for a great discussion, Dr, Dave!
My proposal is for the WPA rules. Some league systems (especially APA) would probably be hesitant to accept such a rule.
I would certainly support the rule change for WPA. The chattering sound is obvious and is actually the result of the multiple hits. It's hard to argue with/ @@DrDaveBilliards
I am for ANY rule that makes each player make the shot as intended. I think most of us knew it was a multi-hit but we just accepted it as a miscue, and normally cursed at the leave. The most annoying thing in pool is a miscue where they pocket a ball by mistake, and the rules allow it.
It bothers me too, but there have been some strong arguments on the “cons” side of the fence.
Awesome video Dave! 👍 😊 🎱
Thanks Tony. If you don't mind me asking, what do you think? Should miscues be fouls?
@@DrDaveBilliards I've been playing the game for 44 years and still going so the current rule is the only one I've ever played with.
Imagine playing in a major tournament, you're in the finals and you're straight on the 8-Ball and need to draw back to the 9 for the win.
You make sure you chalk up, stroke the ball and BOOM! YOU MISCUE!
It would be pretty tough to accept the fact that you just gave up ball in hand on an unintentional miscue.
It's kind of tricky because it's bad enough it was unintentional but to give up ball in hand too is brutal.
But again that's the only way I've ever played.
P.S. I do see your point on why it s a foul. The videos of the miscues are very telling and I love how you break things down.
Keep up the fantastic work pal! 👍😊 🎱
@@tonyrobles9070 Thanks for the input Tony, which I value.
Out of topic, but what is your opinion regarding the beef between WPA and Matchroom? Would love to hear your thoughts
Honestly, I am not aware of all the behind-the-scenes drama and politics, so I don’t really have an opinion yet. Although, I love the MatchRoom tournaments and all the money they are putting into the sport.
Interesting and probably correct. However, I play in the APA, in noisy bars with no referees and no slow motion cameras. We already have 15 minute arguments over placing a marker on the pocket when shooting the 8. I can only imagine if miscues were fouls how many arguments there would be. It already takes 4 hours to get thru a nights 5, 8-ball matches.
The APA would probably never adopt such a rule change even if the WPA official rules of pool were changed. The APA already has many “nonstandard” rules per the info here:
billiards.colostate.edu/resources/rules/rule-differences
If the intent is to reduce the amount of intentional miscues, I'm not sure that making miscues a foul is the solution. I feel that is trading one discretionary foul for another discretionary foul would be a wash - but there are far more unintentional miscues currently. Those would all become fouls, and that would lead to more subjective calls.
Maybe the pro scene will have sensors in the balls to detect multiple cue hits in the future if it becomes a larger problem. I'm still having issues getting scoop shots out of our bar leagues.
Good points.
@@DrDaveBilliards I think the penalty of losing your turn due to uncontrolled cue ball motion (and presumably a missed shot) is enough to justify miscues not being a foul.
@@kameronpeterson3601 This seems to be the majority opinion.
So, the same way many leagues enforce certain fouls based on skill level (e.g. Three Foul Rule), maybe this should be considered a foul beyond a certain skill level, say a D+/C- or above.
You're not rewarding it in this case, but simply not over-penalizing those still learning.
The proposal is for the official WPA rules used in pro events. League systems always make changes in the official rules to create a "more inviting" and "less harsh" environment for their players.
Hey Dave, I’ve got an idea for a new video with a topic which is very controversial and it is yet never addressed on your channel or your videos.
„Winner breaks or alternate breaks, which is better?“
In Germany we have this discussion almost every tournament and there are good arguments for both sides. In any other sports, for example tennis, they alternate on who is starting each round . Only in pool we have the winner always starting every new round.
I think you’d do a very entertaining video about this.
Thank you for the suggestion. I will consider it, but the list of videos I want to do is already vey long.
Hi Dr. Dave! Great binge-worthy content and I doubt you'll see this comment, much less respond, but I'd like to see a video demonstrating various pro players' strokes. Some players have a long, beautiful almost "wavy" or loopy, loose and relaxed stroke resembling a"figure 8" or see-saw motion like many Filipino players, including Efron and Bustamante. While others have a high and frozen elbow with a straight take-back and follow-through. Hope I'm describing this right. I love Efron and SVB's stroke. Thank you!
I talk about some pro pool strokes a little at the beginning (unusual pro strokes) and end ("best practices" pro strokes) of my "10 Secrets of a GOOD STROKE in Pool" video:
ua-cam.com/video/JeZPLFW3MBg/v-deo.html
and I analyze Shane's break stroke in detail here:
ua-cam.com/video/WAEnKCL3stU/v-deo.html
Other than that, many of the "unusual" things pro players do isn't because it is the best approach. It is just what they learned to master on their own after with countless hours of practice. For example, the common Filipino motion is good for getting the arm loose, but it doesn't really provide any other real benefit. Usually, their final stroke into the ball looks like any other fixed-elbow stroke into the ball.
That is a tough call.
Whether or not every Miss q would be a foul.
Many years ago I do recall people pulling that stunt on me Miss Qing intentionally.
Hmmm
Every Miss q I'm not sure what do you think ?
It is a tough decision. That's why I was hoping for the all the discussion that is occurring.
The rules should strive to remove anything that depends on intention because it's too subjective, and for that reason miscues should be considered fouls - as long as the definition is clear as you described.
Thanks Gage.
just to point out, in italian billiards, 5 pins game , is two year that miscue is always a foul, because is considered always a double contact. sorry for my english, but it's rather rusty.
Thank you for sharing that. I was not aware.
I definitely agree. I think it will be toughtto change the pool culture and could result in more disagreements in league games
Agreed. This rule change would probably not be embraced by league systems, especially APA.
Yes much better at the 410 Mark without the music❤
Perhaps they could be considered fouls, I think the problem is you need a high speed camera to prove they happened if it's a very slight miscue and not completely obvious to the players and ref
I'd say that in 35 years of shooting, I've only had about a small handful of players ask for ball in hand after a miscue, but that was because no balls made contact with each other or a rail, not because of the miscue itself
As I mentioned in the video, fouls would be called only on obvious miscues. Even novice players know a miscue when they see (or hear) one. You don't need a camera, because I already clearly showed that every miscue involves sliding tip contact and secondary hits. If the rule is changed, a miscue would called a foul automatically (with no camera required).
Im old school - i still think jump cues should be disallowed. As for miscues I dont see this new evidence of making it a foul would dramatically change much (especially in competition) so sure I'm good with making it a foul
Thanks for the comment and agreement.
But then players could jump with their break cue. You’d have to disallow jumping all the way which would change the dynamic and the sport dramatically. Or you disallow phenolic tips completely but than again people would use these invisible hard rubber tips to break and jump. For TV it’s also better and more entertaining when jumping is allowed. The effect and confusion of removing jump cues is too big + the pro players can consistently play safety’s where you can’t jump. This pro skill would be gone and the hard earned skill gap and layer of depth would be gone too.
Don’t produce problems where there aren’t any. Let the game evolve and don’t be against new things without a logical reason.
@@hanno6926 My point is masse's would increase and are equally entertaining. Plus all the new players with this new equipment do not learn the old skills that are still difficult. It's just replacing one skill with another that is now 20-30 years old
gonna chalk up every shots now , i can only imagine The City League want to change this maybe i been known to be one of lucky ones in League , many probably won't admit they miscues some will
If miscues were to be penalized as fouls, far more people would definitely make it a point to shoot well, understand the off-center hit distance limit, be more careful with side spin and drag/follow, and in general actually improve their stroking technique and become better shooters.
So why not? :)
Agreed. And, IMO, pros should not be miscuing. And if they do, they should be penalized.
Was thinking the same thing. I myself am passionate about pool and I miscue too many times. This rule would definitely make me more mindful when doing any kind of spin.
And they should remain allowed just as "stick fouls" are allowed in some circles. As long as it was not intentional (which is the only wording needed).
JMNSHO
And my miscues do not involve additional hits on the cue ball. And they almost all go anyway, so less ball deflection as well apparently. Perhaps because I rarely miscue on English and it is usually low or high spin, which is why the shots go anyway, Rarely if ever under the ball. Unlike all these "pros" I see who aim way down at the bottom of the cue ball regardless of what they intent to do. I never aim up like that... ever. I have sent you a few up close shots. I don't generally rehearse shots so what I post is what came out of a rack I shot off.
This will come down to a debate on just what constitutes the window of time which defines "momentary contact".
Billiard balls are hard and inelastic from the tip's POV.
Hard tips are pretty much inelastic as well.
The "soft tip" you used still looked pretty hard to me (different video)
A REAL soft tip IS elastic and compresses on impact and has a couple microseconds longer "grip time". or "tip time" and is therefore slightly better at imparting spin on the cue ball.
You should do a hard tip soft tip comparison to show that claim. I think a soft tip can actually strike outside your parameter. Is there some science why you arrived at 1/2 R as the limit of the strike point range? And then there is the masse shot shooters where elevation is required to apply the spin yet keep the ball from jutting away too far. Shooting down on the ball for a masse is better with a soft tip because of lengthened tip time adds spin.
The "intentional" wording is already in the rules, and many example of illegal "intentional" miscues can be found here:
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/foul/miscue/
You are correct that a softer tip has a slightly longer tip contact time, but it cannot impart more spin per the info and videos here:
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/cue-tip/hardness/
@@DrDaveBilliards I watched your video there a long time ago and I don't think you went down into the "soft tip" realm far enough, because they definitely operate differently for me and most folks with multiple sticks in their bag. I just use one.
Tip time = bite time and bite time = more spin for the same force and contact point.
You "soft tip" never even compressed a little bit and you concluded no difference. If it doesn't compress a little, it falls into the "hard tip" range IMO.
@@DrDaveBilliards That is what I said. What I was remarking on is your lengthened wording about "trying to affect the outcome". "Intentional" covers all of it.
@@cosmicraysshotsintothelight If you watch all the videos and read all the explanations in the "Can a softer tip put more spin on the ball?" section at the following link, you will see that I and others have in fact "gone down into the 'soft tip' realm quite far enough:"
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/cue-tip/hardness/
A foul is a foul, inteded or not.
Although the logic here is hard to argue against, a miscue by anyone holding himself out as any kind of skilled player already brings with it shame, embarrassment and the laughter and ribbing of his friends and acquaintances -- which is punishment enough.
The outcome of the shot is also usually bad enough, but not always.
@@DrDaveBilliards Heh heh, I've miscued more times than I'd care to admit to and can't recall a single time the result has been good. But your mileage may vary. Seriously, many thanks for some great instructional vids and much appreciated.
@@philmann3476 I’ve seen “lucky” miscues more in 8-ball, where all sorts of things can happen with an unexpected, but still legal, miscue and legal hit (even on an unintended ball).
You can make a cue ball track wildly different than the cue direction, without a miscue, displaying none of the miscue vibration or sound, and with a perfectly legal single strike milliseconds level contact. 30 degrees is dead easy, some SERIOUS intended squirt. Just sayin'.
I disagree with your final conclusion, although I must admit some of the reasons for your thinking are compelling, especially the multiple contact. My thinking is that the rule has been there for a long time and I've personally never seen someone challenge a called miscue fowl, so based on that I think the rule is good as is If it ain't broken, don't fix it. Even if it does happen once a nation year, is it worth a change? As far as 'rewarding a bad shot', that happens fairly frequently with non miscues, actually a LOT with novice players, so I don't buy that as an argument for a rule change.
Can you link to a video example of the type of shot you are describing, where the CB goes off in a wild direction with a normal, legal hit?
Thank you so much for this analysis. Please stop the music during slow motion as its incongruent .. really takes effort to separate visual speed for auditory
Based on input from several people, the circus music seems to have been a bad choice.
@DrDaveBilliards your content is great .. really appreciate the details. And I play UK 8 ball
@@richardpaterson5498 Thank you, and you're welcome. I aim to swerve. :)
_Not_ first.
And the argument for calling miscues fouls is very compelling.
Not first, but very early. Good job.
Obviously, I agree with your opinion.
@@DrDaveBilliards I thought that your opinion was very well hidden behind the unbiased evidence you presented.
@@kurtkensson2059 Thank you. I tried, but I have opinions too, and this is a tough sell based on the cons at the end of the video.
Wow. All the years I've been playing pool, I never thought of a miscue as a foul. Never crossed my mind. Miscues are pretty obvious most of the time and often result in a foul anyway. The video evidence is pretty conclusive doublehit fouls occur. However, I think a miscue would need to be defined as clearly sending the object ball off it's intended path which is always obvious. A miscue on a follow shot may not always be so obvious. One can miscue on a cue ball frozen on rail shot, for example, yet the cue ball still goes in it's intended direction. That shot can be construed as a mishit and not necessarily a miscue. Lines may get a little blurry in some instances. A rule change would need to be absolutely clear in its definition.
Good points.
I agree with Dr Dave on this one!
Thanks! Great minds think alike. :)
So was the call that Sajin miscued trying to drawback and miscued and the ball jumped over the 1 ball in the European open 2022 was bad call?
See my "BAD CALLS in Pro Matches - Unintentional Miscue SCOOP SHOTS" video:
ua-cam.com/video/UOERQUw25DQ/v-deo.html
Scoop shots are currently treated just like miscue shots. A foul cannot be called unless there is clear visual evidence or if the miscue is judged to be intentional.
The only possible explanation for calling a foul on an unintentional scoop is if you are sure the tip hit the CB first, and not the CB and table at the same time (or the table first). Then it would be obvious there was sliding contact and a secondary hit causing the scoop jump, in which case there would have been a clear double-hit foul. But this can be difficult to see during a live shot, and the benefit of any doubt should always go to the shooter. Some unintentional scoops do involve the tip hitting the CB and table at the same time (or even the table first), which results in a single clean hit with no miscue or secondary contact (although, it could be argued that the tip being in contact with the table during CB contact is not proper). Super slow motion examples of all types of scoop shots can be found in the videos here:
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/foul/scoop/
I agree that all miscues are fouls.
con if you make all miscues a foul.
what about when you miscue not intentional but still make your intended ball that you were trying to make.
I have done this more than once.
yes I don't get the leave that I was trying to achieve but I still control the table.
I also think that all split hits should be a foul.
Under the proposed rule change, it doesn't matter if you make a ball or not. The miscue would still be a foul, and your opponent would still get ball in hand.
@@DrDaveBilliards
Yes that's why I think it's a con.
@@danp6101 Understood. Then don't miscue. :)
@@DrDaveBilliards
Yeah.
Because every pool player never miscued before.
I only disagree with the sound part of the ruling. As a person who is almost completely deaf it would be very hard for me to use that as justification even for a blatant miscue.
Good point. Thank you for pointing this out.
@@DrDaveBilliards No problem Dr. Keep up the fantastic work.
@@raymondcaraway Thanks. I plan to continue to do my best since I aim to swerve. :)
I think, if l dont remembering wrong, a miscue was a foul back in the 1970's when we played straight pool... 👍
I don’t know, but I wouldn’t be surprised.
@@DrDaveBilliards yesterday's it was, I played straight pool from 1978
If miscues all become a foul, what is the penalty for a miscue foul? BTW, I have blocked all your competitors websites until I have absorbed all of your videos. Thanks.
The penalty would be the same as any foul … ball in hand for your opponent. I’m glad to hear you’ve decided to do some “homework” with my videos and website. :)
I agree all miscues should be made fouls.
I thought so too until I saw all the resistance.
@@DrDaveBilliards as long as they have the "intent" clause regarding miscues, it will never truly be an evenly-applied Rule. I also believe that a really good shooter can miscue on purpose and make it look like a mistake, and act as though it were a mistake. Making all miscues fouls literally takes the "MISCUE" out of a shooter's strategy, forcing them to play the game cleanly.
@@PeabodysLaboratory Fortunately, intentional miscues are rare, and they would not be allowed by any ref or any decent player. Examples can be found here:
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/foul/miscue/
I dunno if they should be fouls. That would just discourage the top players from playing amazing shots where there is a risk of miss hitting the white. People like venom must miss hit all the time and it would discourage creativity. A deliberate mis cue can also be the only viable shot in some rare circumstances during a safety exchange
FYI, under the WPA "official rules of pool," deliberate miscues are currently considered serious unsportsmanlike conduct fouls.
Interesting take. Can you give an example of when a deliberate miscue is the only viable shot?
I’m genuinely curious.
See the videos under the "intentional miscue fouls" sentence here:
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/foul/miscue/
I cant find a pool example of it on here but this clip kinda gives an idea of what I mean, I've been in situations like this where you could also hit a cushion in pool games but could only get safe tucked up safe near the object ball@@dd0ck ua-cam.com/video/bf7PoNF8vzM/v-deo.html I had no idea this wasnt allowed in pool tbh and neither have at least 2 players Ive played against
That's an "intentional miscue." You are correct. That is a serious foul (unsportsmanlike conduct) in pool. I was always shocked that is allowed in snooker, which generally has very strict rules.
No! I've been playing pool for 63 years, and I can't recall having miscues being a problem for anyone except the shooter. To me, it would be like double jeopardy.
You've obviously never played against people who get lucky (especially in 8-ball). And you probably have seen any of the intentional miscues here:
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/foul/miscue/
@DrDaveBilliards yes I've seen them, but it's just the unlucky part of the game. But still, I can probably count those on one hand, and if there are more, then it just proves my point that it's taken as part of the game. I guess what I'm really trying to say here is it's not been a problem big enough to cause a stink over. A la, no one is bitching about it. You're the first I've heard. hmmm... just saying.
@@rondo1775 Check out my "BAD CALLS in Pro Matches - Unintentional Miscue SCOOP SHOTS" video:
ua-cam.com/video/UOERQUw25DQ/v-deo.html
Even top pro refs seems to have trouble deciding when miscues should be called as fouls (with how the rules are currently written).
@DrDaveBilliards I'm sorry, doc, but I just don't see a problem here. Like I said, in 63 years, I've never seen anyone complain that it should be made a foul simply because of a miscues. That fact alone is punishment enough. Otherwise, I guess on this one, we'll have to agree to disagree. Which would be a first for me. Love your stuff.
@@rondo1775 I know this is a “hard sell.” I’m not 100% sure either, based on the pros and cons at the end of the video. Thanks for your input.
I would say no. If miscues are labelled as fouls, so should masse shots.
The consensus seems to be "No!"
I thought a miscue in Snooker was always called a foul...?
Not true. In fact, they even allow intentional miscues in snooker! They are used in safeties sometimes.
@@DrDaveBilliards oh right, now that you say it, it's so obvious to me! lol
no they shouldn't...not everyone follows through the same or has the same angle of play as you are recording in a controlled environment. Like trying to bring instant replay into the game...maybe for the pros you can do something like that...but its supposed to be a gentlemans game...if the called ball in a tourney is under question call a ref. league play is completely a more relaxed set of rules
The motion of the CB is all you need to observe. If the CB has motion very different from what would be expected for the shot being played, then the miscue has resulted in a sliding-tip push or secondary contact, both of which are fouls.
I'm sorry The music ruined it for me when you were doing the intentional miscues.
I would have rather heard the slow-mo audio or nothing at all sorry that's just me❤
Understood.
Yes, they should be fowls, they might be deliberately done. I would not put it past some people.
But which fowl? Chicken? Pheasant? Dove?
@@bleearg13 I was going to say something, but I'll just leave with ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!
Absolutely not. If the APA adopted it it would start arguments, which we need less of. If the WPA adopted it it would ruin the tour. Balls in hand are a disaster, the last thing professional pool needs are more balls in hand. Unless the players are calling for this, leave it be.
Thank you for your opinions. Good points.
Is that a force follow shot? 😂
Haha
A person can accidentally miscue, and the cue ball could still hit his object ball. That would not be a foul.
Correct. An unintentional miscue is not a foul under current rules. For more info, see:
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/foul/miscue/
I believe miscues should be fouls. It’d take intent completely off the table. One thing about extremely good players, is they always seem to get “lucky” on “bad” shots.
Judging intent is definitely problematic.
No
That seems to be the majority opinion.
Should be incoming player option to shoot or have them shoot again. Treat it like a roll out. There is definitely going to be more problems with people understanding the rules like with push shots. Pool is a beautiful game played by dumb people.
That might be a good alternative (even if the "dumb people" won't "get it"). :)
I've miscued before and still made a legal hit, CB hits OB, then one of those hits a rail. Unless it would be a foul for some other reason than the miscue itself, a miscue alone should not be a foul. The secondary hits in the video cannot be detected without high speed camera's, there may be good reason to believe a secondary hit happened, but if you can't see it with your naked eye it can't be said it happened.
You don't need to detect the sliding and pushing tip contact or secondary hits. They are known to occur on every miscue shot, so they don't need to be seen to know they are occurring.
@@DrDaveBilliards Question, you've proven beyond a shadow of a doubt every miscue is in fact a double hit incurring a foul why isn't that the rule? Does this evidence need to be shown to the pool rule gods so they see for themselves a double hit occurs on every miscue, and change the rules, or do you think there a remote possibility there could be a miscue of some type that doesn't have a double hit and no foul was committed?
@@stevemiller1159 The "cons" I summarize at the end of the video, and those reinforced in the many comments show that a change in the rules on this matter would not be well received.
I'm playing pool for 35 years and I can't remember any ocasion when I got any benefit by miscueing. In most cases it was a foul or a lost game. In the best scenario I've lost my turn. Anyway, if a multiple contact between the tip and the cueball isn't allowed, it's a foul.
I’ve definitely runout racks after miscueing and pocketing the object ball, both in practice and in competition.
Haven't you ever still pocketed a ball after a miscue on an attempted draw shot? I have many times. I have also experienced and seen many other examples of favorable outcomes on miscue shots (especially in 8-ball leagues).
@DrDaveBilliards but does the miscue really give any advantage over hitting the shot fully as intended? I think that would lead the more unscrupulous opponents to start questioning more shots just because they might gain an unfair advantage compared with the possible benefit of an accidental miscue.
@@chrisknowles64 I don’t understand the focus on intent or potential benefits (or lack thereof) of miscues. If the cue ball goes into the pocket, it’s a scratch, regardless of intent. If you hit the cue ball with the ferrule, it’s a scratch, regardless of intent. The case being made in this video isn’t whether there may/may not be a strategic advantage to miscuing or that players will/won’t start calling fouls that haven’t occured, but that a miscue constitutes a foul under the already established rules (i.e. multiple hits of the cue ball or hitting the cue ball with the shaft) and that thought should be given to making miscues constitute a foul in the direct lettering of the rules.
Arguments over fouls will *always* occur and therefore shouldn’t be a deciding factor in deciding what constitutes a foul. In other words, jerks are going to be jerks regardless of the rules, so the focus should be on making a consistent set of rules that make the most sense.
Most miscues are simply mistakes, but intentional miscues (which are not allowed) can definitely be used to your advantage. Examples can be found in the videos under the "intentional miscue fouls" sentence here:
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/foul/miscue/
Damn it Dr. Dave, don't be messin' with my miscues buddy! lol Ya know....I used to respect you, but now you've gone too FAR! ;)
Miscues should be fouls, for the reasons your slow motion videos reveal.
Obviously, I agree.
@@DrDaveBilliards I’d like to see you tackle fouls in carom billiards. For example, double hits and pushes. Pushes are pretty obvious, but double hits aren’t. When cue ball is close to first object ball. Using inside or outside English. Also, cue tip still on cue ball when object ball is very close to cue ball. Thanks!
@@rayeraskin5799 I already cover double hit detection and avoidance in detail in numerous videos here:
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/foul/double-hit/
I also cover push shots here:
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/foul/push/
and frozen-CB shots here:
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/foul/frozen/
Enjoy!
Don't change the rules.
I have been compiling a list of suggested rule changes for many years at the bottom of the page here:
billiards.colostate.edu/resources/rules/
Do you and others think all those changes are bad?
I guess it's because I miscue often. Develop a shacking. One of our other players agrees
Hey Dave... Did Mr. Reyes hit this cue ball twice on this shot? ua-cam.com/video/4WrnpbihbRY/v-deo.html I think maybe he did and no one noticed at the time.
That was an exhibition match, where they are more "lenient" with the rules. He was attempting a fouetté or whip shot:
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/foul/whip/
but that was definitely a double-hit foul per the info here:
billiards.colostate.edu/faq/foul/double-hit/
@@DrDaveBilliards I have a few close to call shots...
Tight on the Two
ua-cam.com/video/bkj2pG-Cv0s/v-deo.html
Up Close...
ua-cam.com/video/j1duW9ETC84/v-deo.html
Another worrisome strike...
ua-cam.com/video/1LUe15AzEIw/v-deo.html
What about this shot?
ua-cam.com/video/4REdrF4zR-E/v-deo.html