On 16 May 2018, Theodore Heis.sig wrote
> On Tue, 15 May 2018 12:02:13 +0100,
> HVS <***@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 14 May 2018, Tony Cooper wrote
>>> On Mon, 14 May 2018 00:31:40 +0100, soup <***@hotmail.com>
>>>> On 13/05/2018 22:52, Jerry Friedman wrote:
>>>>> On 5/13/18 7:24 AM, soup wrote:
>>>>>> "Two shots carry " etc
>>>>> What does that mean?
>>>> If one of the players sink the cue ball the other player gets
>>>> two visits to the table.
>>>> In some places if they successfully pot a ball on their first
>>>> visit then that is considered it, they do not get another go
>>>> if on the other hand they just use the first visit to set up
>>>> a pot then they get their second shot.
>>>> In other places it doesn't matter what happens on the first
>>>> visit they still get their second visit, i.e "two shots
>>> "Visits to the table" is not an expression that I've
>>> seen/heard. Context tells me it's the opportunity to take a
>>> turn, but it's not usage I know of.
>> It makes very little difference in practice, but a "visit" is
>> made up of one or more shots.
>> Under current rules, if your opponent makes a foul, you get 2
>> visits: the first visit is a single, free shot -- you can play
>> this from where the cue ball has landed, or move it anywhere
>> behing the baulk line; you can shoot in any direction; you
>> can hit any ball, including the black; and you can pot any
>> ball other than the black. If nothing goes down, though, one
>> ball has to touch a cushion (explained below).
>> The second visit is a standard turn - you have to hit one of
>> your own colours, can't hit the black first, etc.
> Very interesting. I spent a lot of time playing pool back in the
> 70s and early 80s, and in that time (or since) never heard the
> "Two shots carry" terminology. I also can't recall ever seeing
> this particular rule applied or even mentioned. The ability to
> "spot" the cue ball wherever one wished (behind the balk line, of
> course) was considered enough of an advantage, I guess.
> My knowledge of the rules at the time was based strictly on
> experience, but it was experience from bars (and from friends and
> family) in at least three different U.S. states--so I think the
> vagaries of "house rules" mentioned elsethread likely cancelled
> each other out for the most part.
> Most of the folks I played with had a couple of main variants, one
> being "call shot" and the other what we lovingly called "slop."
> In the first variant, you had to call the shot you intended to
> make before taking it. If you didn't make the shot it was a
> fault, and the other player took their turn. In slop, if you sank
> one of your own balls, you kept going. Usually in slop, it was
> still expected that one call the shot intended for the eight ball.
>> (OT) Some other differences from "old rules":
>> On the break, at least two balls other than the cue ball must
>> pass an imaginary line between the centre pockets. (Introduced
>> to stop people just tapping the pack -- to discourage them from
>> playing snooker instead of pool.)
> Yes, that one is new to me as well. Most places I played (bars,
> pool halls, and homes) had a rule that if the eight ball went in a
> pocket on the break, that player won the game. Is anything like
> that in the current rules?
No: the rule now is that if the black/8-ball goes down on the break, it's
neither a foul nor a win: the balls are re-racked, and the same player
breaks again, without a penalty.
This only works, of course, if you have a way to retrieve the black.
In the club where I play, the table is the usual coin-operated thing; league
matches don't pay per play, though, and thus have the keys to the slide that
holds the potted balls, so the black can be retrieved that way. When we're
paying for just normal/non-league games, the bar holds the keys and passes
them over if the black goes down on the break.
I've not been in the situation of playing on a coin-operated table which
didn't accommodate this, so I've got no idea what happens if the pub/club
take a hard line which doesn't allow a free re-rack. (Probably "loses all
future trade for regular players".)
>> After the cue ball hits one of your colours, you either need to
>> pot a ball, or have any ball -- any colour, or the black, or
>> the cue ball -- touch a cushion. (Introduced to stop people
>> tucking the cue ball up against other balls without moving them
>> much -- again, to discourage them from playing snooker instead
>> of pool.)
> New to me as well. I can definitely remember using this defensive
> strategy (and having it used against me). If one was halfway
> decent at bank shots, it wasn't a huge obstacle.
>> An exception to the "must touch a cushion" rule is if you're
>> completely snookered on your colours - in that case, you claim
>> it as a "total snooker" and don't have to pot a ball or touch a
>> cushion after you hit one of your balls. (You have to claim the
>> total snooker, in case it's challenged. If you don't -- and
>> even if it's patently obvious that it's a total snooker, you
>> remain subject to the "must touch a cushion" rule. And yes:
>> ill-feelings have ensued when this happens....)
>> It's not a foul if you pot one of your opponent's colours as
>> well as one of your own. This is called a "skill shot", and
>> whilst at my level of play it usually applies to a fluke, the
>> intent is to give players a way to clear an opponent's ball
>> that's sitting over/blocking a pocket.
>> The "skill shot" rule also applies to the black: if you're
>> playing your last colour, and you pot that along with the black
>> ball, you win. The order in which the balls go down doesn't
>> matter -- the black can go down first, and your ball second,
>> and you still win.
>> (That last rule can be significant: if your last ball is
>> sitting in front of the black, which in turn is sitting in
>> front of a pocket, you win if you can hit your ball in such a
>> way as to put the black down and have your ball follow it into
>> the pocket.)
>> If your opponent fouls when you're on the black, you get two
>> shots on the black.
> These are all previously unknown to me as well.
The WPA (World Pool-Billiard Association) rules that are used where I play
(both league and friendly games) were standardised in 2005, with some minor
tweaks since then. There are some occasional players who use the pre-2005
rules, and I'm happy to play that way if someone wishes. Obviously, though,
those of us who play in league games prefer to use the current rules for
friendly/practice games. (I didn't know the dates off the top of my head -- I
checked on them before replying to billvan.)
I hadn't played pool for some years (15 or so) before starting to play again
about 8 or 10 years ago. By then, I'd forgotten most of the detailed rules
anyway, so learning the then-recently-introduced "new rules" was fairly easy
The rules can be found at http://wpapool.com/rules-of-play/
CanEng (30yrs) and BrEng (34yrs), indiscriminately mixed