|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Feb 15, 2007 18:45:42 GMT
... If the cueball fails to reach an imaginary line through the black peg and parallel with the top cushion and does not strike another ball, it will be taken out of play and the player loses his break. (This does not apply to the last ball of the game).... Your wording is better than mine ;) However I dont like the ' it will be taken out of play', would prefer to be ' it will be returned to the tray'. I feel someone being awkward about this, particularly after the bar has gone, could insist on the ball is now 'lost' stopping his opponent from scoring some more off it.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Feb 14, 2007 15:42:18 GMT
I am a little confused (nothing new then), if we dont quantify it, it then becomes a rule that is interpreted by the scorer and that is risky and asks for inconsistentcy from them. For example how many times can it be done or can they keep playing and 'missing' until the bar drops?
I thought the whole purpose of the rule changes is to bring them up to date but also take out any inconsistantcy errors that could be made by a scorer. I feel we need a set of rules that is a black and white ruling so there is no guesswork. IMO if a rule cannot be clear it should not be there.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Feb 14, 2007 14:20:11 GMT
You need a simple rule addition Keith, if a ball fails to reach an imaginary line drawn at a tangent to the Black Peg without hitting another ball then it is end of break and the ball is returned to the next player, this will apply throughout the game. This also stops a player rolling a ball up and resting on or near the Black Peg.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Feb 14, 2007 13:21:23 GMT
I was thinking along the same lines.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Feb 14, 2007 0:58:15 GMT
I think this rule is wrong. It should be a foul shot if it obstructs a player from putting the ball in any position within the 'D'.
Rule 15, clearly states you can place the ball anywhere within the 'D' however a ball under 27d rule will stop that rule from being played to so it penalizes the player.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Feb 14, 2007 0:40:34 GMT
Currently reads etc
This should be changed to 'From the break position the red ball MUST always be used on the red spot........
'should' implies the player has a choice, MUST makes it clear ! Even though there is an always following, it is poor wording.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Feb 14, 2007 13:27:31 GMT
Totally agree on this, even a bulb blowing can lose you 2-3 minutes.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Feb 14, 2007 0:48:02 GMT
Consider rephrasing the last word :o ;)
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Dec 19, 2006 15:15:07 GMT
The 'Silly Billiards' game though should be played as envisaged and not as a Jersey practice. The rules should be using the whole 'D' to encourage the lesser players to enter. Every decent bar billiards player must admit that their greatest chance of losing to lesser players whether playing league, comps or opens is when they are on a table where the break is very difficult. The whole game is levelled by the removing of the break and that is the concept remove the break ONLY the rest is potting and the lesser players can do this equally well, so making it 'Off the Spot' is then only handicapping them.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Dec 19, 2006 11:27:23 GMT
Getting back to break is rewarded by your score going on the board. Though a good change to the rules, this wasn't part of the original rules though. IMO Chris as the originator of this version of the game then you should be the one to propose a set of rules to play to, whether by discussion on this forum or BBQ or whatever. Then if anyone wants to propose an alternative to any rules then that is an option at the final vote stage as amendments to the proposals. In regards the triangle position then I believe there should be a proposal on the 'size' and construction of the triangle and a dimension (X) given as shown in the following image to ensure all triangles are the same. Then the positioning should be as recommended by you 'touching the outer edge of the 100 hole' this ensuring that everything is consistent between every game.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Feb 21, 2007 19:06:05 GMT
I believe Keith, correct me if I am wrong the rule in Inter Area is it can run longer but the opponents must be notified before the game if it does.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Feb 20, 2007 18:09:12 GMT
As Homer would say 'DOH' :)
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Feb 20, 2007 14:04:38 GMT
No posts for three days now. I have been waiting for tommo to put up a post to dispute ;) Just kidding, been too busy for last week :(
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Feb 12, 2007 17:39:56 GMT
Contovercial the one concerning the break shot I think tommo, in theory maybe a good rule however it would be so much at risk of actual abuse or at least applied abuse or cheating. A scenario I could envisage is a same county player scoring for his m8 and the scorer calls it back to be played again, because he 'says' it fell off the spot. At an Open the opponent can often be at least 8-10 feet away so could never argue the fact.
My opinion is it happens at all levels of the game, and is the responsibility of the player to ensure it is spotted ok. If I had a problem with a ball not spotting securely I will quite happily give it a dent to sit in if needed. This suggestion IMO is like saying the ball bobbled when a striker is about to shoot, or a 'kick' happening in snooker or even bar billiards, it is part of the game.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Dec 11, 2006 14:16:54 GMT
Nice to see some action is now being done on this and appointing you to sort this out Chris. Hopefully you will get support from those needed to contribute. Members of the forum will no doubt try and help with clarifying of the wording.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Oct 31, 2006 13:18:43 GMT
The AEBBA needs a Sec first :(
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Aug 6, 2006 11:52:27 GMT
Agree with the comments Clive, and when I wrote it almost knew what your reply would be. As many leagues are finding out, it is a struggle and clubs seem to benefit from picking up players better than pubs, probably because the youngsters are having a go. I dont think there is a simple answer and BB will eventually go the same as shove-halfpenny, dominoes and crib leagues of the past. Much of it has to go down to breweries attitudes and replacing of the traditional landlord with the managers of the present, who are mainly (not all) in it for the profit only.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Aug 5, 2006 9:17:50 GMT
New young players - many come from families already involved in bar billiards. But the game does not seem to have sufficient appeal to attract others, it needs to be promoted somehow. The young players should get 'their' friends involved ;)
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Aug 3, 2006 20:39:15 GMT
I may be a mod but I dont do anything in moderation ;)
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Aug 4, 2006 9:17:35 GMT
If only it were shown on TV a few times........youngsters who hadn't seen it before might think "that looks good, wouldn't mind a go at that." Clive be honest now, to anyone who doesn't play the game, it is less exciting than Big Brother or watching paint set. BB suffers from the same problem that 'billiards' of the olden days had, repetitive shots that to an onlooker looks as boring as it can get. 9 Ball pool for example has a lot more going for it when it comes to TV. You cannot televise a 3 shot game, which is all it is at the top level.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Aug 3, 2006 21:55:04 GMT
I think part of the success is how KT says, ideally you want one team from a pub rather than two, it doesnt suit the landlord this system 'obviously', but is more likely to get a few interested m8's together to make a second team up. When a pub has two teams already then there seems more reluctance for someone to 'start up' the game. Another point is when a player leaves a top team is to find a lesser experienced player and bring him on, don't grab another top player from another side as this can have a knock on effect and the team splits up, and another table goes :(
Sparky, I agree your point on playing better teams frightens some players, however the answer generally is to set the table up to be as straight as possible allowing the players more table time and break building confidence. Too many teams think the opposite, and set up tricky tables at the detriment of the lesser players. The top players if you give too many chances will beat them anyway so you may as well give your players the best chance and make it easier.
A great example of this is the Portcullis table at Wallingford, a very straightforward table that bites you if you relax too much on it. Wallingford C play from it too in the Inter Area and 'although good players' have beaten many top players on it, even when they had the break, one mistake and 10K gets put past them. The table runs a good time, and 20K+ is possible if quickly played, so players are never safe until a big score is recorded. It is all about confidence, and the easier the table the more confident you become.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Aug 3, 2006 20:26:15 GMT
KT's method was to go around brow beating landlords into getting teams up and running ! I don't know how equal the teams are arranged but another method of stimulating the league if there is a large difference between a few teams and the rest is to split it in effect into two leagues but still play each other. So you keep the number of games up but give a chance to lesser strength teams to have achance of winning their section. That way if you pick up another lesser team they feel less out of their depth than they would in one section or league. Hope I explained that ok, ie Section 1 and 2 exist and all play each other through the season but they are separate sections as far as winning their section is concerned.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on Oct 21, 2007 13:40:31 GMT
You could try getting in touch with the Secretary or Mick Shephard and he would probably give you the weeks results. Just a suggestion if anyone wanted to keep it up to date on here now.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on May 11, 2007 14:56:07 GMT
I mean all singles games are played over two legs.
All other games pairs etc are played as they were in the earlier rounds except for variations when neutral tables are used.
The landlords final is Alex Stacey v Ray Croucher, how this was arrived at will have to be taken up with Mick, without details I can only presume he was scratched through not playing an earlier game, but just guessing, I repeat I was not in charge of competitions this year. On at least two occasions I dropped off info to the pub and later there were claims that it was never received, whether that is down to bar persons I dont know.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on May 11, 2007 13:33:32 GMT
So you will be early ;) Mick was given the job of sorting the order, it was aibt of a problem due to some cannot get there early so some rearranging was done :( Blame him ;D
There will be normal toss up, it is the same as all finals two games. Why should it be different?
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on May 11, 2007 10:21:18 GMT
ORDER OF PLAY. APPROXIMATE TIMES. Table 1. 15.00hrs. BLEWBURY CUP. 16.30hrs. MIXED TRIPLES. 18.00hrs. 'B' KNOCKOUT CUP. Table 2. 15.00hrs. 'B' PAIRS. 16.30hrs. LADIES INDIVIDUAL. 17.30hrs. GERRY TARRY CUP. 18.45hrs. LEAGUE KNOCKOUT CUP. Table 3. 15.00hrs. 'A' PAIRS. 16.30hrs. JOHN PAYNE HANDICAP. 17.15hrs. MIXED PAIRS. Table 4. 15.00hrs. LANDLORDS CUP. 16.30hrs. OFF THE SPOT. 17.15hrs. JOHN DENNY CUP. 18.00hrs. MENS INDIVIDUAL. Please all players be ready to start at these times, thanks. Please inform anyone you know, if you can....
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on May 7, 2007 22:14:47 GMT
Nobody tells me anything, I am only the Secretary :(
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on May 7, 2007 16:58:52 GMT
We have a meeting tomorrow night, and sort out the final order on the tables. With you playing so many finals you may be starting at about 3am ;) Just kidding will post asap m8.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on May 3, 2007 8:34:14 GMT
ALL resolved panic over ;D
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pringle (R.I.P.) on May 1, 2007 16:25:34 GMT
R & C won 5-0 Tandem won 4-1 Horse & Harrow won 4-1
The first table was nonsense for the aggregate, as cards were not with me to calculate that. It was unsorted just showing the points.
|
|