|
|
Post by daveuk1 on May 9, 2019 7:19:48 GMT
Oh and just read rule 14, so the last ball shot is basically THREE pin, it is more than possible to pot a ball off the side cushion into the 100 even with a mushroom in front of the hole. Come on these rules have been written by 3 pin players for 3 pin players. I have always agreed with break back in single leg games and I can sorta understand not waiting for the red, but I feel the rest is ****. Maybe that's why Suffolk were not asked for any input into your rule changes, I mean we paid our thirty quid affiliation fee promptly and yet we still seem to be the forgotten county
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2019 7:38:07 GMT
But the way I read your rules is the only time you can play a foul shot and lose your entire score is on the "last ball shot" any other time any foul of any sorts only loses your break. Sorry I have been playing 4 pin for the best part of half a century and the Sudbury league has been going for a lot longer, no offence meant but most of you wouldn't even consider playing 4 pin until a few years ago and now it seems you want to rewrite the rules to fall in line with 3 pin rules. Aebba are susposed to be the governing body of bar billiards although they have previously said they won't interfere with the four pin game but now they have taken it opon themselves to rewrite the rules to suit 3 pin. My opinion only but why take a set of rules that have evolved over a great many years and totally change the basics Dave, We cannot keep saying the same thing over again. The AEBBA do not intend to ‘interfere’ with the 4-Pin game. The rules above relate to the AEBBA 4-Pin Open Championships only. They have no impact whatsoever on the game played in Sudbury or at the EA Open. However, it has been recognised by some 4-pin stalwarts that some amendment was required from the standard 4-pin rules when the game is to be played on a 3-pin table so as to ensure that a player is simply not allowed to continually play the break shot with a reverse every now and then. No offence taken - you are entitled to your view - but before any rule changes you were unhappy because players were able to play the traditional break shot and you felt it ruined the game - these rules make that more difficult and yet you are still unhappy. I believe you’d only really be satisfied if AEBBA did not host a 4-Pin event or, if they did it was just a repeat of the EA Open. I believe that it benefits the wider Bar Billiards community to have a variety of events in a range of formats. That’s why we have an Alternate Rules Championships and an ‘Off the Spot’ Open. It has also been recognised by many that with the AEBBA hosting and promoting this event it has brought 4-pin Bar Billiards to the attention of many more people in recent times - surely you’d want to applaud that? It’s great to note that your league has been thriving for so long and that it is as popular as ever - sadly that is not the case everywhere because, in part, people have not been encouraged to play. We have some of the finest exponents of the game - the finest players who enjoy considerable success - who have not brought a new player to the game in 25 years. Part of the remit of the AEBBA is to challenge this lack of action and do whatever it takes to get more players playing the game - in whatever format they prefer. We had some success in 2018 with participation up in National Events by more than 10% in almost every case. There’s always more to do but that is my main objective. Whilst I want you to participate in the AEBBA 4-Pin Open Championships, I want everyone to try this highly popular event - you are, of course free to choose not to if you object so strongly to how this competition is run. For me it would be a shame but it is your choice. I hope many people will give it a try and enjoy the different challenge that it presents. Do let me know if you intend to withdraw. Best wishes, Lorin |
|
taffy
Distinguished Member
Posts: 514
|
Post by taffy on May 9, 2019 8:23:52 GMT
I didn't realise (because i don't play it) that 3-pin isn't a sin nisi for the 200 peg all game like 4-pin. However, i think its a brave and exciting move for just this competition and we can look at it. I practice and practice 200 shots all the time, it is going to draw loads of balls back up the table to stop in or around the 200 hole in the hope of a "first time up 200" whilst praying that the 'other ball' you played went down a hole so that you, the incumbent player, gains the benefit of this brave move on the next shot.
it's going to flush a lot of balls into the 'diamond' central area for 50s as well. maybe we can get away from 10-20-30 and the other legendary one; 30-20-10!!!!
I love the idea of either coloured ball as the cue ball, especialy when in a real hurry towards the end of the game, again exciting, expect to see a blur of cues and balls as the ticker ticks!
I like the idea of first offence counts (first skittle down is the first and only offence) except that that comes down sometimes to interpretation. if we can try it then fair do's after all, a ball that strikes a 50 peg and deflects further on to the 200 is a little rough. I hope the scorer isn't in a daze though....
the 4mm rule for the peg location is still ambiguous. because there is such a big difference in the waistline between a mushroom and a skittle and a curved hole can't be properly measured, i hope we'll go to a far more technical way of measuring one day...another time.
Just one thing that needs clarifying for me,
rule 4 and also further down with it which is the foul call on it at 3.c.
it doesn't actually say the same holes, it just says; (i ad lib here) get the break shot balls down three times on the trot anywhere on the table then on the next play, one of the balls must stay up?
wow! 'anywhere'. well i never got three down without screwing up so it won't effect me anyway! BUT, I like this rule too!
well done to all of you for being brave and trying something designed to open the game.
I think we could have been experimenting before we did this but maybe we can also reflect on it afterwards.
that just leaves Newmarket's; 'red is the cue ball at the break' or Tommo's interpretation which is a great starter; "play the red and white in either order at the break shot (up to you)" and I'll be in heaven!
If this 200 rule works Dave, it will complement the narrow tables even MORE than a wide. getting balls flushed out and back up the table and letting players that know all the angles really let go. The narrow version already lends itself more to open play than the break shot and this would help it more.
can i ask; what is the title of the winner? are they the England Open Champion or are they the English AEBBA Open winner?
brilliant! there's a lot there to try in one go!
Taffy
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on May 9, 2019 9:27:11 GMT
In the continued absence of an AEBBA website and the resultant lack any recent public copy of the rules and AGM minutes on this forum or elsewhere, could the AEBBA Secretary explain when this fundamental rule was removed to allow these changes? As far as I am aware it was still in force up until the 2018 AGM in the set of rules I was asked to correlate and were published a year ago. I can see no proposal to remove rule 20 on the 2018 agenda.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2019 10:32:53 GMT
In the continued absence of an AEBBA website and the resultant lack any recent public copy of the rules and AGM minutes on this forum or elsewhere, could the AEBBA Secretary explain when this fundamental rule was removed to allow these changes? As far as I am aware it was still in force up until the 2018 AGM in the set of rules I was asked to correlate and were published a year ago. I can see no proposal to remove rule 20 on the 2018 agenda. Chris - why not be clear about what it is you are trying to achieve?? Another grenade incoming! I couldn't be more fed up of this. It is the continual we can't do this or we can't do that which has led the custodians of the game to achieve next to nothing in terms of game growth for a generation or more - to feel content that they did their bit whilst hiding behind a ruleset and governance structure deliberately designed to ensure that for the miserly sum of £20 the association can be hamstrung and unable to achieve any lasting change or benefit. Meanwhile everybody says that things must change to arrest the decline. Be assured - this is the last time I will go around this merrygoround because of you or anyone else. The AEBBA website continues to be down for some much needed maintenance - I have apologised for that. But since it is the contention of many that they only use Proboards - it shouldn't inconvenience them too much! It will be up and running with greater capability as soon as I get some dedicated time to work on it. Answering posts like this only serves to delay it further. I have attached the rules in the absence of the website. AEBBA Rules Constitution 2019.docx (373.48 KB) The rule you identify has not been removed - but of course you knew that already. That is not the purpose of your post. The purpose of your post is to imply that we are acting unconstitutionally in creating a set of rules for a new and unique competition. I don't agree with your view - neither did the current AEBBA committee when we discussed it. Rule 20 was and remains in place to provide reassurance to leagues such as Sudbury or Wellingborough (if they had any concerns) that as an organisation we do not intend to change the rules they use in their leagues, competitions etc. There will be no top down imposition of rules that they must adhere too. Unlike that of 3-Pin Bar Billiards where leagues do have some obligation to follow the recognised rules of the game. My understanding is that when we first started to reach out to Suffolk Bar Billiards it was with the reassurances above. This was not about the AEBBA 4-Pin Open Championships as that event hadn't been created. Neither was it about the Alternate Rules being played as a 4-Pin event because Rule 61 addresses that. To analyse your interpretation of Rule 20 - you are saying that 4-Pin must only ever (subject to an AGM change!!!) be played according to the rules of the EA Open - so that implies only on traditional 4-Pin tables - what nonsense. The AEBBA must be allowed to exercise full control over the rules it applies for it's own competitions. As I have said before - it has no impact on other 4-Pin competitions or leagues so let's not make this more than it is. Our aim is to create appealing competitions and more opportunities for people to play the game - you may not like that we are carefully succeeding in that aim but hey, we are and will hopefully continue to do so. To underpin this, change must and will continue to happen. I am sorry that you feel I am riding roughshod through the delicate constitution of the AEBBA and therefore paying no regard to due process - that is not my intention. I want to create opportunities to play and that create exciting events that are well supported. The increase in numbers for this event, yet again, suggest that things are moving in the right direction. That said - it's not a dictatorship and what I want to achieve is clearly very different to your objectives. If you could create a poll on this forum I'd appreciate it - then we can proceed. Please add the following options for people to vote upon: Option 1 - cancel the event and return the entry fees to those who have paid - we shall then seek to institute these rules next year via an AGM in December. Option 2 - proceed as published above As with Dave - I'm really sorry that you are unhappy with the approach here and so I'll be disappointed but will understand if you feel you need to withdraw from the event in order to be true to your principles. Best wishes, Lorin |
|
|
|
Post by Coleman Jnr on May 9, 2019 10:47:22 GMT
Every year we seem to have the same discussions, to the point it’s almost like a copy and paste!
I’m not sure what all the fuss is about, these are the rules the AEBBA have decided upon for the competition, if you don’t like them, as with alternative rules and off the spot etc don’t enter!
Given the frequent change of circumstances and entries up and down in competitions, new things have to be done and yet it appears whenever anyone tries to do that it is met with negativity. What we could do is all stand still and do nothing, because I can assure you within a few years NONE of us would be playing the game which would be a shame but at least it would mean the time people put in (and I mean at all levels, county, AEBBA, inter area, inter league, everything) won’t be required anymore so they can take up a new hobby with us less stressful!
And since everyone has to explain themselves now a days these are my views and not of the AEBBA!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2019 12:28:07 GMT
In the continued absence of an AEBBA website and the resultant lack any recent public copy of the rules and AGM minutes on this forum or elsewhere, could the AEBBA Secretary explain when this fundamental rule was removed to allow these changes? As far as I am aware it was still in force up until the 2018 AGM in the set of rules I was asked to correlate and were published a year ago. I can see no proposal to remove rule 20 on the 2018 agenda. Chris - why not be clear about what it is you are trying to achieve?? Another grenade incoming! I couldn't be more fed up of this. It is the continual we can't do this or we can't do that which has led the custodians of the game to achieve next to nothing in terms of game growth for a generation or more - to feel content that they did their bit whilst hiding behind a ruleset and governance structure deliberately designed to ensure that for the miserly sum of £20 the association can be hamstrung and unable to achieve any lasting change or benefit. Meanwhile everybody says that things must change to arrest the decline. Be assured - this is the last time I will go around this merrygoround because of you or anyone else. The AEBBA website continues to be down for some much needed maintenance - I have apologised for that. But since it is the contention of many that they only use Proboards - it shouldn't inconvenience them too much! It will be up and running with greater capability as soon as I get some dedicated time to work on it. Answering posts like this only serves to delay it further. I have attached the rules in the absence of the website. View AttachmentThe rule you identify has not been removed - but of course you knew that already. That is not the purpose of your post. The purpose of your post is to imply that we are acting unconstitutionally in creating a set of rules for a new and unique competition. I don't agree with your view - neither did the current AEBBA committee when we discussed it. Rule 20 was and remains in place to provide reassurance to leagues such as Sudbury or Wellingborough (if they had any concerns) that as an organisation we do not intend to change the rules they use in their leagues, competitions etc. There will be no top down imposition of rules that they must adhere too. Unlike that of 3-Pin Bar Billiards where leagues do have some obligation to follow the recognised rules of the game. My understanding is that when we first started to reach out to Suffolk Bar Billiards it was with the reassurances above. This was not about the AEBBA 4-Pin Open Championships as that event hadn't been created. Neither was it about the Alternate Rules being played as a 4-Pin event because Rule 61 addresses that. To analyse your interpretation of Rule 20 - you are saying that 4-Pin must only ever (subject to an AGM change!!!) be played according to the rules of the EA Open - so that implies only on traditional 4-Pin tables - what nonsense. The AEBBA must be allowed to exercise full control over the rules it applies for it's own competitions. As I have said before - it has no impact on other 4-Pin competitions or leagues so let's not make this more than it is. Our aim is to create appealing competitions and more opportunities for people to play the game - you may not like that we are carefully succeeding in that aim but hey, we are and will hopefully continue to do so. To underpin this, change must and will continue to happen. I am sorry that you feel I am riding roughshod through the delicate constitution of the AEBBA and therefore paying no regard to due process - that is not my intention. I want to create opportunities to play and that create exciting events that are well supported. The increase in numbers for this event, yet again, suggest that things are moving in the right direction. That said - it's not a dictatorship and what I want to achieve is clearly very different to your objectives. If you could create a poll on this forum I'd appreciate it - then we can proceed. Please add the following options for people to vote upon: Option 1 - cancel the event and return the entry fees to those who have paid - we shall then seek to institute these rules next year via an AGM in December. Option 2 - proceed as published above As with Dave - I'm really sorry that you are unhappy with the approach here and so I'll be disappointed but will understand if you feel you need to withdraw from the event in order to be true to your principles. Best wishes, Lorin Could you please add an option 3 - the 4-pin event is handed back to Northants and so they have complete control of any rules they wish to institute. Thus revenue is lost to AEBBA which has an impact on other financial commitments. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on May 9, 2019 13:34:11 GMT
I sincerely applaud those who make the effort to govern and enhance our game, but expect them not to exceed the authority with which they have been invested.
You already know and would have expected what I am trying to achieve in that the tournament I won last year should be played correctly to the AEBBA rules currently in force. What is unreasonable in that?
I will happily defend that title under any set of rules democratically passed at an A.G.M. Until rule 20 is rescinded, which AEBBA could have proposed at the last AGM after EXACTLY the same discussions last year, then my contention is that you play by the current AEBBA rule book. The clear and unequivocal rule is that four pin WILL be played to the rules of the E.A. Open. You should not try and browbeat through any new set of rules for this competition that do not appear in the AEBBA rule book.
The correct procedure is to play to the E.A. rules this year, rescind rule 20 at the 2019 AGM, pass the proposed set of rules at the same AGM, then play next year’s tournament to the new set of rules. At least then I would have the opportunity to vote against three-pin-ising the four-pin game, that I have come to enjoy, at an AGM. If the three pin rules are passed democratically then I have no reason to object whether I like them or not.
Why suggest cancelling this year’s tournament? just play it to the rules that were used last year and that still remain in force.
|
|
|
|
Post by gandalf the untidy on May 9, 2019 16:50:55 GMT
Again full marks for AEBBA in coming up with a radical set of rules, Lorin and Steve are right when they say see how it goes. i'm sure ALL will enjoy it if they let themselves enjoy it, i certainly will.
|
|
|
|
Post by barbelman on May 9, 2019 17:14:51 GMT
We have to experiment and have flexibility in interpretation of the rules especially such trite ones as these.
A scenario;
year one - think of a slight mod. to 4 pin rules
year two - get it approved at AGM
year two - apply it and dislike it
year three - get it changed back approved at AGM
year three - back where you started
Three years to change a minor point! Playing rules (not constitutional) should be fluid and changeable within parameters which should be obvious to most especially with respect to a newly fledged competition such as this.
We're all on same side people and all want the same things. There is NO competition between the ProBoards site and the AEBBA website/facebook page. If there were I would not bother with any of them...
Tony
|
|
|
|
Post by daveuk1 on May 9, 2019 17:42:43 GMT
I think sav has hit the nail on the head,,,,,
About 13 months or more ago the question was raised about the rules for the AEBBA 4 pin tournament and it was basically agreed that they should abide by their own ruling that rules for four pin should be those used in the East Anglian open, in previous years Northants had basically used the EA rules with a few minor twists which everyone was happy with as it was a Northants tournament and THEIR rules. Since the last aebba four pin an AGM has been and passed and nothing has changed. I know Gandalf came up with a sensible proposal but for some reason that was never voted on at the AGM and therefore nothing has changed.
Gandalf knows I have always been in favour of the break back in single leg games.
But now reading the new proposed rules it seems like this is 4 pin played to 3 pin rules, infact it will even become 3 pin on the last ball shot as one pin will be removed, seems strange to me when the 100 shot off a side cushion is always on even with a peg infront of the 100, a shot made even easier on the aebba tables as the 100 shot is conveniently marked.
Not using the red ball? Sorta agree, but the reasons ive heard is it will speed up the game, so why the heck waste time if a peg is nudged by a ball and the game has to stop while the ref looks at the peg to deside if it has moved and if it has can he replace it, if he cant the next shot is then played when again the ref must check if the peg can now be replaced amd so on, how frustrating could that be to the person in play, if the peg has moved, leave it there until the end of break, ok so I know its just another 3 pin rule being brought into 4 pin along with the one up after 3 consecutive break shots, if people are worried about players consistently getting the 50-50 break shot then why not ban it and make the game more fun for everyone, which again is what im told these rules are about.
In friendlies and county tournaments I am happy to abide by any rules, but to play in an aebba competition with such 3 pin biased rules in a so called 4 pin event beggars belief.
In short I believe you have to agree that Sav is correct in saying nothing has been officially changed since he won the tournament last year and the rules must be those as agreed a few years back by aebba, get your ass in gear and make changes at the AGM ready for next year.
Suffolk have paid their thirty pounds affiliation fee but even as the main four pin county they were not even consulted about any rule changes and were only made aware of the rule changes less than two weeks before the date of the event and then only because the question was asked, if that question hasn't been asked would these proposed rule changes of even been made public?
Sorry I am passionate about 4 pin and bar billiards in general, but 3 and 4 are totally different games and no matter what, you cant have one set of rules to cover both.
My opinions only
So lets drink beer and play real billiards, three pin on standard tables and four pin on narrow tables.
Rant over, im off to play real four pin on a nice narrow top while drinking beer.
|
|
|
|
Post by milhouse on May 9, 2019 18:18:15 GMT
As people have said before, same argument every year and it is really getting tiresome.
AEBBA (lorin in particular) has made some amazing advancements since taking over the secretaries job and i for one applaud pretty much everything he has done - for the good of the game!
To modify the rules for this competition to make the game more free flowing should be commended, not condoned.
What i cannot get my head around is Sav & Dave wanting the tournmant to be played to the current AEBBA Rule 20. I can understand the reasoning for that BUT that would mean AEBBA would have to play the tournament on narrow tables, of which they own none. So what do these people want to happen? if they say play to Rule 20 but on "normal" tables, then that is going against that rule, which is what the original argument from Sav was all about, changing the rules from the constitution. You cannot have it both ways.
Rather than constantly having a moan about Lorin wanting to change things (for the better), how about encouraging the work he is doing? No wonder the game never moves forward with so many stumbing blocks in the way.
I thank you Loring for trying to change things for the better and i hope these constant moans from the same few players do not put you off continuing the great work you are doing.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
Post by daveuk1 on May 9, 2019 18:21:17 GMT
Unlike 3 pin, 4 pin rules do NOT specify the size or height of tables
|
|
|
|
Post by specflue on May 10, 2019 8:40:10 GMT
I would be happy to talk to AEBBA about them using narrow tables if they wanted to.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobhall on May 10, 2019 9:16:23 GMT
I would be happy to talk to AEBBA about them using narrow tables if they wanted to. They have a two day competition one 4pin 1 3pin so not suitable plus 4pin is a game of fun scores are lower and plenty of shots especially when you play daveuk lol lets all just have fun |
|
|
|
Post by daveuk1 on May 10, 2019 9:57:35 GMT
Please don't get me totally wrong, I'm happy to play by any rules, when you enter a competition you basically agree that. But when I entered the aebba 4 pin I expected the rules to be the same as last year and then with a handful of days to go before the tournament we are hit with numerous rule changes. Surely the best way forward is aebba to agree by their rules and play this year to the same rules as last year and then next year Northants to run a 4 pin on the Saturday before their own 3 pin open and if the aebba still want to have their own 4 pin tournament they run it as an alternative rules comp on another date, after all the rules they are proposing are basically play 4 pin to 3 pin rules so they are very different to real 4 pin.
Also I am sure Suffolk would consider hosting the aebba 4 pin next year, there would be no trouble hiring out narrow tables to them and it would mean no transport costs
|
|
taffy
Distinguished Member
Posts: 514
|
Post by taffy on May 10, 2019 16:57:02 GMT
I've said it to you before Dave - twice - that eventually AEBBA would have their own ideas of good rules and i asked you, ney! nearly pleaded with you; be the ones (Sudbury) to look at the rules, test ideas first, be the leaders. if not AEBBA will have their own ideas and take the lead.
having narrow tables has killed the break shot but they are a rare beast and the rest of the country will adapt wides - as usual - to promote the game and therefore rules to suit it. AEBBA appear to have altered the rules without having the good fortune to test these things in a league environment and have done it for the one competition that they run, if i had any reposte it would be that things should be tested. I can imagine that some of your disappointment at Sudbury not having a say in this.
get out there and have a summer 'experimental' league or test day or whatever in your area. not all your tables are narrow so there's still the opportunity to test out new ideas. test the Newmarket break and some of the stuff you may enjoy a week tomorrow.
when you see how barbelman explains the long winded procedure then you also see that web sites don't work and neither do AGMs!
i have tested stuff and when we can form any kind of league we'll sit down and democratically do things. I just hope my way is the right way! Mushtittles!
Taffy
|
|
|
|
Post by daveuk1 on May 10, 2019 18:17:31 GMT
Taffy, narrow tables hasn't killed the break shot, it's just made it harder.
Can you not see these are basically 3 pin rules being forced on 4 pin? even down to the point where the last ball has to be sunk down either the 200 or 100 hole, but on 3 pin there isn't a peg in front of the 100 hole so we'll change the rules again to say in 4 pin we will remove the peg in front of the 100 hole and make it 3 pin for the last ball.
Having said that maybe I'm wrong because what would happen in 3 pin if we said knocking the peg down in front of the 200 hole only loses your break? Why don't we just play four pin but only have 3 pins and lose the one in front of the 200 hole?
Yes on wide tables even playing 4 pin the 50-50 split break shot is almost as boring as playing 3 pin, so how about a rule to make it more interesting in both 3 and 4 pin saying if a player pot's all the balls on the table their break ends and the other player starts with a break shot? Remembering that their break will also finish if they sink all the balls.
If we have to play this tournament by the silly rules then we must play them to the letter of the rules. The last ball must be sunk down either the 200 or 100 hole (4 pin rules say any hole) so the bar has dropped the player has the cue ball and one ball left on the table to play at, he plays his shot, hits the object, one of the balls drops down a hole, the other does a little dance, rims a couple of holes and then drops down, say the 10, the player loses his entire score as the rules clearly state the last ball must go down the 200 or 100 hole off one cushion.
I guess you all know my feelings by now, yes change rules, experiment but let people know of the changes we'll in advance and don't do them in a tournament billied as a national
|
|
taffy
Distinguished Member
Posts: 514
|
Post by taffy on May 10, 2019 18:44:01 GMT
The last ball must be sunk down either the 200 or 100 hole (4 pin rules say any hole) so the bar has dropped the player has the cue ball and one ball left on the table to play at, he plays his shot, hits the object, one of the balls drops down a hole, the other does a little dance, rims a couple of holes and then drops down, say the 10, the player loses his entire score as the rules clearly state the last ball must go down the 200 or 100 hole off one cushion. That's not what they mean Dave. They mean that with a single ball in hand, "the last ball" it must go in the 100 or the 200. i'm guessing that the mushrooms will be encouraged to sit in the 50 holes and the headboard dropped. (Jelkes friendly!) I like it. I think for a competition it is worthy, for a man in the pub it's going to be 20 times hit 'n hopes. But this is 'our' national competition and it's worthy. how does a game of 3-pin finish? also, what is the forfeit of the 200 throughout the game when it is knocked over? there's a helluva lot of changes for one day and it would take a season to see how the game alters but to me I have a chance to be brave and get some kind of parity with the lads that can mostly do the 50-50. I deserved to get to the quarter-final last year and deserved to go no further as i couldn't keep a score, like this though, i have the feeling things are evening up a little. well it seems that way? Maybe Gandolf and the Hastings wrecking crew will try some. come on Dave, that 200 hole, you know that if you play your best game you could really bag some points, for you it's a bloody godsend. Crickey! Ladbrokes have brought you in from 40/1 to 5/4 odds on! If all the balls get jammed up up at the baulk end there WON'T BE a 50/50 shot! Taffy |
|
|
|
Post by gandalf the untidy on May 10, 2019 19:12:36 GMT
Glad you are willing to play these rules Dave.
I'm not on the AEBBA committee but i know they thought long and hard about making the amendments, their brief i believe and their constitution instructs the EABBA to ensure the opportunity for all players would be as equal and as fair as possible and at he same time to minimise the bad experiences that can occur with the sudbury rules, surely that has to be right and will in the long run promote 4 pin in the country as a whole in the future. Surely this should be the target of all leagues and once again the new AEBBA committee are leading from the front on this.
I am aware of at least 4 people who may not go to Sudbury next year because they felt your rules were not fair on them. Again we've already discussed the reasons privately.
We have had many talks on this over the years and i know that some in Suffolk agree with my thoughts while others are not even prepared to consider change and sadly that's the same in all leagues, but you, i ,taffy and many others in the AEBBA only have the best intentions for the development and expansion of 4 pin in the future. We just have different ideas on how to move forward with them.
As mentioned by others the time for discussion/comment should be after the open at Northampton after we have all have played the current AEBBA rules. We must try not to harp on too long to avoid this issue getting boring for the boards readers. Why not do it in PM's
Best regards to all 4 pinners wherever they are, and i confirm i will continue to play 4 pin where ever it is and whatever rules are in force and whatever width and height tables are used, as i believe 4 pin is more fun, but whats wrong with trying to making it even more fun? nothing in my book!
We look forward to seeing you at the Hastings 4 pin tourny in June for some more 4 pin and 4 pin talk, we will be playing the same rules as last year, which i know you all enjoyed.
should i feel the need to make further comment it will be via PM's
PS taffy is right, with the 200 peg only a break loser its got to be a real advantage to you aggressive sudbury risk takers and particularly you Steve and LCW, where us scaredy cat 3 pinners plodding around on the 30/10 holes will surely come unstuck.
The tipsters might catch a cold or two this year a well
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2019 19:28:37 GMT
As mentioned by others the time for discussion/comment should be after the open at Northampton after we have all have played the current AEBBA rules. We must try not to harp on too long to avoid this issue getting boring ......... Hasn't stopped you from weighing in with your two penn'orth though, has it, Gandalf ?  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2019 19:54:53 GMT
Dave L / Chris S
As a matter of some urgency could you please forward or point me in the direction of the published and definitive 4-pin rules that was shared with all players who entered the 2019 EA Open.
An extensive internet search and conversations with several participants at the event has failed to yield this document. Please could you tell me where it is in the public domain.
Lorin
|
|
taffy
Distinguished Member
Posts: 514
|
Post by taffy on May 10, 2019 19:55:50 GMT
3. If a combination of foul shots occur, then, regardless of sequence of events, the first penalty counts only.
if this is like for two pins down? (of which one is the 200) then there isn't a greater forfeit than loss of break anymore and the rule is unnecessary.
just a small ditty
taffy
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on May 10, 2019 20:21:51 GMT
Dave L / Chris S As a matter of some urgency could you please forward or point me in the direction of the published and definitive 4-pin rules that was shared with all players who entered the 2019 EA Open. An extensive internet search and conversations with several participants at the event has failed to yield this document. Please could you tell me where it is in the public domain. Lorin Hi Lorin, They do not appear to be in the 2019 programme, Dave L is running a pub this evening, I 'll put some feelers out. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2019 20:32:13 GMT
Dave L / Chris S As a matter of some urgency could you please forward or point me in the direction of the published and definitive 4-pin rules that was shared with all players who entered the 2019 EA Open. An extensive internet search and conversations with several participants at the event has failed to yield this document. Please could you tell me where it is in the public domain. Lorin Hi Lorin, They do not appear to be in the 2019 programme, Dave L is running a pub this evening, I 'll put some feelers out. But where were/are they published? |
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on May 10, 2019 20:48:22 GMT
Steve Hale is looking into it
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2019 21:05:33 GMT
Steve Hale is looking into it But you were presented with rules at/before the tournament? |
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Sav on May 10, 2019 21:17:21 GMT
Cannot remember, I was too busy setting up tables. www.sdbbl.co.uk/page/rules.htmlSteve says the rules are basically the Sudbury League rules with a couple of amendments in such as the baulk line being used and balls must be stationary/fully dropped into a pocket before the next shot can commence. Chris Cass has been asked to supply a copy in the morning |
|
|
|
Post by daveuk1 on May 10, 2019 22:05:53 GMT
The AEBBA were presented with the agreed rules for adoption back in 2013.
I posted the rules on here back in 2014 and we did an amendment in 2017 when we adopted the baulk lines which was also posted on here and AEBBA advised.
Copies of the rules are always available at our open.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2019 23:14:14 GMT
Cannot remember, I was too busy setting up tables. www.sdbbl.co.uk/page/rules.htmlSteve says the rules are basically the Sudbury League rules with a couple of amendments in such as the baulk line being used and balls must be stationary/fully dropped into a pocket before the next shot can commence. Chris Cass has been asked to supply a copy in the morning When speaking to some players from this year’s EA Open they advised that the ‘ball must be stationary/fully dropped...’ was not in use and they were allowed to play whilst balls were in motion. Sounds like not everyone got the memo. |
|
