(888) 445-PONG(7664)
Define your top bar navigation in Apperance > Menus

3 Cup Redemption

Home Page – Flat Forums Rules Debates 3 Cup Redemption

This topic contains 30 replies, has 9 voices, and was last updated by  prusch 5 years, 8 months ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 31 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #17176

    prusch
    Member

    In standard play, any player can take a third shot after two makes. In redemption, the rule is specified that players must alternate shots if there is more than one cup. So, if there are three cups left, the person who shoots first has to take the third ball (rather than have a weaker player shoot one, then have a stronger player knock out the last two).

    I think this works ok, especially in bringing into play redemption for more than 3 cups. It makes the rules wording easy to accommodate all redemption situations for more than 1 cup. However, with only 3 cups left, it seems fair to me to have it play out like a regulation turn – and it wouldn’t add too much to the rules. (it came up yesterday at a satellite, ending an impressive run of shooting somewhat based on a misinterpretation of that rule)

    #17177

    sfoster
    Member

    As follows is the way I’ve always said it should be.

    No matter what happens, with how many cups – the losing team gets 1 extra turn.
    The only difference is that the 3rd ball is a rollback ball that must be alternated and can continue being shot until the first miss.

    I think this is the most concise, easiest to understand rebuttal rule. (perhaps with some rewording, but the concept itself is simple)
    It stands very close to what they have now, but is perhaps a little clearer and would lend to certain teams being able to minimize the cup differential.

    For example if you lose by 5, and your teammate misses, you could still hit to make it so you only lost by 4.

    Not a big deal IMO, and it would incorporate the way peter would like things to be.
    Since that rollback ball would begin like a regular 3rd shot, any teammate could take it.

    #17178

    kjforsberg
    Member

    I kind of like the way foster has it worded – but you’d have to throw in the exception for if the last cup was hit once…. (only one redemption shot for the other team)

    Think of this scenario –
    OT game, 3 cups to 3 cups. Both teams have a good/hot player, and a weak/cold player. Obviously you want the weak/cold player to shoot at the full 3 rack, and let the good/hot player clean up the other two. In my opinion, both teams should be able to approach the rack the same way – regardless of whether the turn is in regulation or OT – but according to the current rules, they can not.

    #17179

    dwissbrun2
    Member

    No matter what happens, with how many cups – the losing team gets 1 extra turn.

    as i have always said – i’m in favor of redemption in all gamess(prelims/final day)

    however, i don’t think there is any reason to make conditions more favorable for the redeeming team. both of you characterized redemption as an "extra turn" or something to that extent. i don’t view it as an extra turn – it’s redemtion – the game has been won, and redemtion is it’s own entity, not a turn. therefore any rules can apply in redemption – i like the ones the wsobp has. i guess this is basically a beer pong philisophical question for me.

    #17180

    sfoster
    Member
    No matter what happens, with how many cups – the losing team gets 1 extra turn.

    as i have always said – i’m in favor of redemption in all gamess(prelims/final day)

    however, i don’t think there is any reason to make conditions more favorable for the redeeming team. both of you characterized redemption as an "extra turn" or something to that extent. i don’t view it as an extra turn – it’s redemtion – the game has been won, and redemtion is it’s own entity, not a turn. therefore any rules can apply in redemption – i like the ones the wsobp has. i guess this is basically a beer pong philisophical question for me.

    I agree, and I did make a slight modification with my suggestion.

    Although I stated it as one last turn, you’ll notice that this is already very close to the way things are.

    The purpose of that description wasn’t to give the redeeming team any additional advantage – the point was to make the rule set more concise and easier to understand.

    There was a TON of confusion last year with how the rule was supposed to be.
    There was a video of smashing time playing like 8 OTs when they should have won after the 2nd or 3rd, and then even in the finals IWC got it wrong too.

    Obviously the way it is was very confusing to people last year.

    A similar example – Originally BPONG wanted no ball interference or defense until it was completely out of play. Unfortunately people kept screwing that up and so eventually they changed it to prevent so many teams from breaking the rules, and now you can swat the ball after it touches the cups. It’s the same kind of thing here.

    Yes there would be a slight modification to how it is, but it’s minor IMO and this would keep a lot more teams from playing redemption incorrectly – especially with redemption being in the preliminaries this year and with such a strong history of people doing it wrong.

    #17181

    prusch
    Member

    The biggest argument for this modification to the redemption rule, for 3 cups…

    In OT there are only 3 cups on the table for each side. With the potential (or likely) rule change to give one team 2 balls to start OT – one team shoots at their cups with a standard turn and the other has an alternating shot restriction? Just doesn’t seem fair. For a ten cup game, redemption being it’s own entity is a fair argument. For the most part, either team could get to the finish line first. But in OT, when last cups are commonly hit without one team getting a ‘normal turn’, I don’t think the argument that redemption is it’s own entity is a good enough argument to have such a noticeable disparity between the way two teams have to approach the same three shots.

    We had a game end Saturday b/c the other team didn’t know the alternating shots rule. The game is in it’s fourth OT (regular WSOBP redemption rules) – with both teams carried by amazing play by their stronger players. With 3 left on either side, our weaker player hit front cup, and our stronger player hit the back two. The other team thought they could approach it the same way. It was evident after their weaker player hit, and their stronger player hit, that the stronger player thought he could take the third. Ended up becoming a shitty way to end an epic game.

    #17182

    dwissbrun2
    Member

    Ended up becoming a shitty way to end an epic game.

    that is a shitty way to end a game… why didn’t anybody tell the kid not to shoot?

    it was their fault though for not knowing the rules. foster says there was a lot of confusion at wsobp III, i didn’t even know it was an issue. i remember in wsobp II that a lot of people thought you had to alternate who took the 3rd ball (pope’s rule), but the redemption alternation didn’t seem like a big deal.

    as for the overtime scenario you posed peter, i agree that this would be a bs way to have overtime. who is suggesting that the "dominant team" should get 2 balls to start OT? i think the rules are good the way they are. if you’re dominant & you don’t want to give your opponents a chance to run the table then let them go 1st with 1 ball, if you want to start then take the 1 ball. if you’re not the dominant team then you either get the chance to knock out one cup or a chance at all three. this seems much more fair that starting with 2 and getting into the scenario you’re talking about.

    #17183

    prusch
    Member

    that is a shitty way to end a game… why didn’t anybody tell the kid not to shoot?

    We did – but he wasn’t happy that the game wasn’t in his hands (his partner shot and missed).

    it was their fault though for not knowing the rules. foster says there was a lot of confusion at wsobp III, i didn’t even know it was an issue.

    Not sure if it was confusion, or lack of abidance – IWC didn’t alternate in their redemption shots in game 2 of the finals. (They debated for about 30 seconds on who would take it, when there is no option according to the rules). Foster also had an example with Smashing Time vs. Viking Quest, but I think that he actually was confused by the rule (specifically on how many redemption shots can be taken at 1 cup, when the other team just hit their last two).

    as for the overtime scenario you posed peter, i agree that this would be a bs way to have overtime. who is suggesting that the "dominant team" should get 2 balls to start OT?

    I actually think the team hitting last cup first should start with 2, and there was support from others as well. That discussion is in another thread. This discussion is definitely related, but there is good reasoning for starting with two – namely that giving the other team 1 to start easily turns into an advantage for them with one missed shot out of your two balls (something that I’d say happens 75% of the time).

    The scenario that I was talking about could still happen – did happen – just was 3 vs. 3 in OT after one missed shot to start. I realize in the situation, they arguably should have hit their first shot, but looking past that the beer pong philosophical question I’m asking…

    If there are 3 cups on both sides of the table, why should those teams have to approach hitting those cups differently?

    #17184

    wianek
    Member

    i agree that after hitting the first 2 cups in redemption, either player should be able to take the 3rd shot.

    this is off topic, but peter, how are you guys handling which teams qualify in your SCBP satellite series. i saw that a bunch of people qualified on multiple teams. do they get to play on both teams in the final tourney? what happens when two of those teams have to face each other or even if two teams are called to the table at the same time? i’m curious because i also qualified on multiple teams in the St. Louis satellite series and the organizers are debating how to handle the situation.

    #17185

    dub
    Member

    As far as knowing the rules, I feel like it’s not completely the player’s fault if they forget something. My partner and I were trashed in the finals and there was roughly 600 people watching, including the staff, and no one told us we should have alternated. It would have actually saved us a lot of time and grief trying to decide who should take the last shot. In the finals, at the very least, the rules should definitely be even more enforced because it’s so easy to officiate that match. That was the only OT we played in all day, so it never actually came up.

    #17186

    ecastro715
    Member
    that is a shitty way to end a game… why didn’t anybody tell the kid not to shoot?

    We did – but he wasn’t happy that the game wasn’t in his hands (his partner shot and missed).

    I was told not too shoot after my partner hit the first shot, and I hit the second.

    So this is what happened, exactly. We just started into our 5th OT. I missed the first shot. Tyler, Peter’s partner, hit a shot. Peter then hit the next 2. I asked my partner to hit first (which he did) and I hit the second. I expected to be able to take the third shot just as Peter had. Obviously, that didn’t happen, my partner missed our last cup. A shitty way to end the game and my team’s run at this satellite tournament.

    The problem I saw in how this went down was that Peter was able to take 2 shots in a row (without alternating shooters), but then I wasn’t able to take 2 in a row to hit the last 2. I know during a normal redemption, all players must alternate, meaning no player can take 2 shots in a row. But then in OT when there is only 3 cups, I feel Peter should not have been allowed to take that 3rd shot, Tyler should’ve been made to. Or, I should’ve been allowed to take the 3rd. This problem has to come up often enough for the ruling to be considered for change.

    #17187

    solidgold
    Member

    Maybe you should have shot first, let your partner shoot second, and you shoot at the last cup.

    #17188

    prusch
    Member

    Maybe you should have shot first, let your partner shoot second, and you shoot at the last cup.

    Maybe you’re missing the point of the discussion… that perhaps he shouldn’t have to approach the turn differently.

    #17189

    solidgold
    Member
    Maybe you should have shot first, let your partner shoot second, and you shoot at the last cup.

    Maybe you’re missing the point of the discussion… that perhaps he shouldn’t have to approach the turn differently.

    Oh I understand the point, I just don’t think it matters much. So I don’t really care if it gets changed. One person always gets to shoot twice..

    For my team, I shoot at the three rack, my partner shoots at the two rack, and then I shoot at the last cup. So this rule doesn’t effect me at all. We can also shoot like this so no matter what the situation is, our strategy stays the same. I don’t like to over think my shots.

    #17190

    solidgold
    Member

    If he was so pissed that his partner had to shoot twice, then if I were him, I would get a new partner. One that I can trust.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 31 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Free Domestic Shipping on Orders of $50 or More in the US.

Facebook