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

Some rule clarification

Home Page – Flat Forums Rules Debates Some rule clarification

This topic contains 12 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by  skinny 4 years, 10 months ago.

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #27455

    ahearn
    Member

    I need a couple questions answered about the rules.

    First, there was a discussion about Pop rimming that shot out against Frazier. The rule says if the ball does not go in the cup and it knocks it over it doesn’t count. The rules also states that if the ball goes in the cup it counts. However the rule does not explicitly say anything about a ball that goes in an out. Hypothetically one can argue that the spinning ball did not enter the cup, it was spinning on the rim. Anyway, I think the rule needs to be changed to include that.

    Second, two things about bouncing.
    -According to the official rules, bouncing is allowed. A few of us had a discussion on a double/triple/etc bounce. There is currently nothing in the rules regarding the number of times a ball can bounce on the table before it lands in a cup. Am I correc to assume then, it can bounce 100 times on the table before it gets into a cup.
    -I took a shot the other day, not a bounce. The “bitch” cup was missing and my shot landed in that spot on the rack, it bounced on the table hopped up and off a cup and into a cup. This can be defined as a bounce, though it was lucky, and should count correct?

    Thanks!

    #27456

    skinny
    Member

    First, there was a discussion about Pop rimming that shot out against Frazier. The rule says if the ball does not go in the cup and it knocks it over it doesn’t count. The rules also states that if the ball goes in the cup it counts. However the rule does not explicitly say anything about a ball that goes in an out. Hypothetically one can argue that the spinning ball did not enter the cup, it was spinning on the rim. Anyway, I think the rule needs to be changed to include that.

    The actual language is "in the event that a ball does knock a cup over, the shot is counted as a hit, UNLESS it is absolutely clear that the ball had not entered the cup before it was knocked over, in which case the cup is reset and the shot is considered a miss"

    The way I read this, it is clear that if a cup is knocked over, and it is clear that the ball entered the cup before this happened, the cup is counted as hit. I don’t believe it’s truly necesary to explicitly state "it doesnt matter if the ball goes out before the cup is knocked over", but enough people have been confused by this that we will explicitly state this in this year’s rule updates.

    Second, two things about bouncing.
    -According to the official rules, bouncing is allowed. A few of us had a discussion on a double/triple/etc bounce. There is currently nothing in the rules regarding the number of times a ball can bounce on the table before it lands in a cup. Am I correc to assume then, it can bounce 100 times on the table before it gets into a cup.

    Yes, you are correct.

    -I took a shot the other day, not a bounce. The "bitch" cup was missing and my shot landed in that spot on the rack, it bounced on the table hopped up and off a cup and into a cup. This can be defined as a bounce, though it was lucky, and should count correct?

    Correct.

    #27457

    wianek
    Member

    I think that knock over rule should be clarified by saying "the shot does not count unless it is clear the ball broke the plane of the cup". with that wording a shot that was in and out would count since it is likely the shot spun out because there was not enough liquid in the cup to begin with.

    Another rule that needs clarification is the rebuttal rule when it comes to shooting purely for cup differential. If a team hits the last cup on their second shot, and the rebutting team misses their first rebuttal shot, they still get a second shot for cup differential purposes. There seemed to be a bit of confusion about this in Socal.

    #27458

    skinny
    Member

    This is on my list, and will be addressed.

    #27459

    prusch
    Member

    Another rule that needs clarification is the rebuttal rule when it comes to shooting purely for cup differential. If a team hits the last cup on their second shot, and the rebutting team misses their first rebuttal shot, they still get a second shot for cup differential purposes. There seemed to be a bit of confusion about this in Socal.

    The way it is written, there is no shooting for cup differential purposes. I tried to make an announcement at the Open knowing that it would be an issue. No one listened (to be expected), but I didn’t think that Skinny would be the first one to cause a scrum over a valuable cup diff point.

    Section K.A.1.
    a. More than one cup per side remaining when the last cup is sunk. In this case, "Unlimited 1-ball Redemption" is given. Either player may take the first shot, and the ball is rolled back until a player misses.
    b. One cup vs. one cup remaining when the last cup is sunk. In this case the rule is, "Take as many shots as you have balls remaining on your side".

    Seems pretty clear to me that the only time you can have a live ball after a redemption miss is when you have only one cup remaining. If you have more than one cup, your team is shooting the "unlimited 1-ball redemption", which ends on a miss. Hence – no shooting for cup differential purposes.

    Regardless of how correct Judge Prusch is in this matter, some clarification should be made. If one of the authors of the rules can mess it up, there is no doubt others will as well. 1 cup can make or break getting into the final day, so this is no trivial matter.

    #27460

    wianek
    Member

    I agree that the way the rule is written, there should not be a second shot for cup differential. Though that was not the intention of the authors and correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe this rule was phrased differently before WS IV.

    I think the rebuttal rule should just be:

    "Take as many shots as you have balls remaining on your side – if those shots (either 1 or 2) are made, an unlimited 1 ball redemption takes place where either player may take the first shot, and the ball is rolled back until a player misses"

    #27461

    skinny
    Member

    but I believe this rule was phrased differently before WS IV.

    I think you are correct – I’m fairly certain the rule was phrased to give people an additional shot for cup diff, and somehow that disappeared during this year (there was at least one revision to the rules this year concerning water in the cups at Satellite tournaments, so I’m guessing during that revision process, something got screwy).

    We need to discuss this rule internally and make a firm decision on how this will be treated this year. My immediate project is to go over the rules with a fine tooth comb and make sure everything is in order. I’m hoping to get to it this weekend….

    -Skinny

    #27462

    dwissbrun2
    Member

    I vote for keeping the rebuttal rule the way it is. Once last cup is hit regulation is over and you’re in rebuttal. If you have more than 1 cup to hit and you miss then The game is over. I just don’t get why the losers should then possibly get to take away from the winning teams total. Ur kinda saying that the cup differential for the losers is preferred over the winners, who I see as having earned getting that cup on their differential, by winning the game.

    #27463

    wianek
    Member

    I vote for keeping the rebuttal rule the way it is. Once last cup is hit regulation is over and you’re in rebuttal. If you have more than 1 cup to hit and you miss then The game is over. I just don’t get why the losers should then possibly get to take away from the winning teams total. Ur kinda saying that the cup differential for the losers is preferred over the winners, who I see as having earned getting that cup on their differential, by winning the game.

    it’s not about taking away from the winning teams total, it’s about ensuring both teams have the closest amount of shots as possible.

    If you ask me, you should only have as many shots in rebuttal as it took the other team to hit the last cup in their last turn. No unlimited 1 ball rollback, period. So if the last cup is hit and you have 4 cups left you would have no way of forcing oertime. If the last cup is hit on the 2nd shot and the other team has 2 cups, they have 2 shots to hit both cups. If the last cup is hit on the first shot and the other team has 2 cups left it’s game over aside for 1 shot for cup diff. hypothetically, say a team shoots a perfect game an the other team still has 10 cups left and they pull off the miracle rebuttle. The game goes o overtime, despite the fact that 1 team has take 10 shots and the other team has taken 20. It just doesn’t seem fair. Both teams should take the same amount of shots during a game.

    Alternatively, both teams should take the same amount of turns – so in rebuttal you could hit a maximum of 3 cups.

    #27464

    ahearn
    Member

    We should just make everyone happy and shoot till you miss on rebuttals ;)

    #27465

    ecastro715
    Member

    We should just make everyone happy and shoot till you miss on rebuttals ;)

    I wouldn’t be happy.

    #27466

    bondball7
    Member

    I think you are correct – I’m fairly certain the rule was phrased to give people an additional shot for cup diff, and somehow that disappeared during this year (there was at least one revision to the rules this year concerning water in the cups at Satellite tournaments, so I’m guessing during that revision process, something got screwy).

    We need to discuss this rule internally and make a firm decision on how this will be treated this year. My immediate project is to go over the rules with a fine tooth comb and make sure everything is in order. I’m hoping to get to it this weekend….

    -Skinny

    I actually ran into this water rule at a satellite when a team complained that there was too much water in our cups. Admittadly we did have all the cups half full because we drink on the side, but were unaware of the actual rule. Im still a little confused though. Is the rule in place to make sure there is enough in the cups or to make sure there is not too much. Personally I like a lot of water in the cups because it seems to deaden it, but the other team thought just the opposite and thought it made the cups harder. Just wondering what the rule is in place for?

    #27467

    skinny
    Member

    The rule is in place to make sure there is enough water in the cup. Having a cup half full is certainly not a violation of the rules, and there was no reason for your opponents to complain.

    Skinny

Viewing 13 posts - 1 through 13 (of 13 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

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

Facebook