| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Calcwby4u
USA
89 Posts |
 Posted - 08/25/2009 : 10:49:01 PM
|
| No ... that is how they score in USPPA ... if you do not have a clear shot at any object ball (9 Ball game) you would mark down a "safety" .... |
 |
|
|
Showtime
USA
73 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2009 : 09:36:52 AM
|
| Thanks, it's been so long since I shot in their tourneys, I couldn't remember. |
|
|
|
Moose Dragon
USA
128 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2009 : 12:45:49 PM
|
| The definition of a "definsive shot" in the APA is when the shooter has no intent to make a ball. This covers when a player is hooked either intentionally, by bad luck, or by their own doing. If people keep score correctly than it is more difficult to sandbag, and the SLs should be fairly accurate. |
|
|
|
Showtime
USA
73 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2009 : 4:26:03 PM
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by Moose Dragon[/i]
[br]The definition of a "definsive shot" in the APA is when the shooter has no intent to make a ball. This covers when a player is hooked either intentionally, by bad luck, or by their own doing. If people keep score correctly than it is more difficult to sandbag, and the SLs should be fairly accurate.
"This" does not cover when a person is unintentionally hooked and "This" does not cover when a person tries to play defense, but leaves the other player a shot. I see it all the time. If a person is unintentionally hooked and kicks at one of his balls in an attempt to sink his ball, you believe that this shot is as likely to go in as a shot with a clear line of sight (unobstructed)? In fact, the USPPA rule makes more sense, when you consider the two things "This" doesn't cover. However, it still fails to acommodate for a person not trying to make a ball and leaving the other player with a shot.
I agree, people should keep scores more accurately, but then that should probably include people drinking (and/or smoking) less. I will also say, with the bad score keeping now, adding in an extra stat for these people to keep would really screw things up.
I appologize if "This" came across as a jerk.
|
|
|
|
Moose Dragon
USA
128 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2009 : 9:09:44 PM
|
It does cover when a player is hooked for any reason. Of course being hooked does not stop you from trying to make a shot. As far as trying to play defence and leaving a shot I see this all the time as well. the captain or score keeper needs to pay attention and make decisions on a shot of this nature. It is far from perfect but good scorekeeping makes it better.
If a person kicks at a ball with the intent of making it than it is just a shot and no kind of defence.
I do not disagree with either system, but as with anything you can always find flaws in it. |
|
|
|
Keith
USA
242 Posts |
Posted - 08/27/2009 : 10:56:44 AM
|
It seems like you are saying that if a player hooks the other player that it should be marked a D. It also seems that you are saying that if a player intends to play a D and leaves a shot that it should not be marked. The rule states that if you have no intention to make your ball then it is a defense. If you don't make a shot we don't forget to mark an inning. The same goes for a D. If you play one that sucks call it a D- but still mark it. If some one misses a shot but some how hooks the other player. Then it is not a defense. If the player intends to stay at the table if only to play a D on the nest shot then it is not a D. If the player Intends to leave the table after the shot then it is a D even if they make a ball.
I once played a match where both players played a total of 5 Ds in one inning. This was accomplished by trying to leave the ball in front of the pocket and making it instead. |
|
|
|
Moose Dragon
USA
128 Posts |
Posted - 08/27/2009 : 12:56:56 PM
|
Keith
My last post was a response to showtime. If you look at my prior post you can see I do know what the definition of a defensive shot is.
I was talking about when a player is hooked for any reason. If they are just trying to hit a ball than that is a defensive shot. If a player misses a shot with the sole intention of hooking his opponent than that is defense. If that same player was actually trying to make his shot and missed with the good fortune of hooking his opponent than no that is not a defensive shot.
There has been several debates about if you are playing defense and accidentally make the ball is this marked as a defense or not. I personally do not mark defense in this situation. In my opinion a defensive shot has to end the persons turn at the table.
Most of my point is the system works better when people watch what is happening and keep score proplerly. Sometimes that means asking the person that just shot if that was defensive or not.
I can guarantue you that you did not play in a game that had 5 defensive shots in 1 inning. |
|
|
|
Jinny
36 Posts |
Posted - 08/27/2009 : 9:05:57 PM
|
Hi Kerry,
I don't understand a few things about your posts on this subject.
Once you said "The definition of a "defensive shot" in the APA is when the shooter has no intent to make a ball.”
Well, with this I completely agree. Page 93 of the manual defines the Defensive shot in part as:
DEFENSIVE SHOTS: A defensive shot is a shot where the shooter deliberately misses so as to pass his turn at the table on to his opponent. A safety (see SAFETY in these Definitions) is a defensive shot because the shooter had no intention of making a ball of his category. Intention is the key word. Sometimes intent can be a matter of opinion and judgment, but the scorekeeper’s judgment must be accepted by the opposing player. Remember that defensive means deliberately missed. Players with integrity call all safeties and intentionally missed shots. Besides being good sportsmanship, there will be fewer differences on the two scoresheets. The failure to mark defensive shots allows players and teams to advance with inaccurate skill levels. Play honest! Do not pad innings! If a player has a nearly impossible shot and does the best he can, but still fails …………………..
Then you said: "There has been several debates about if you are playing defense and accidentally make the ball is this marked as a defense or not. I personally do not mark defense in this situation. In my opinion a defensive shot has to end the persons turn at the table."
This is the part that I don't understand. If you know the players intention was not to pocket the ball (Intention being the key word), why would you "personally" not mark it? By definition, it is a defensive shot. There is no rule validation that says a defensive shot must end the shooters turn. It is the intention not to pocket a ball that defines it.
Just wondering
Jinny
|
|
|
|
Moose Dragon
USA
128 Posts |
Posted - 08/27/2009 : 9:23:36 PM
|
that is why I said there has been several debates about this subject. there are two trains of thought either: you mark it as defense or you don't. In your post the definition states twice that a defensive shot is one the player deliberately misses. It says nothing about attempting to miss and actually making the ball. It really does not happen that often and even less often does the scorekeeper know it happened. It usually is when a player is trying to leave a ball in front of the pocket and it actually goes in instead. This will look just like a regular shot. Sometimes a player will say I did not mean to make that. I really don't feel very passionate about this if I was told by league officials to mark it as defense I would. I guess my beliefs on this matter contradict my beliefs on scorekeeping. Oh well I never said I was the brightest bulb around.
Maybe this is something the league office should address in the bylaws.
It is nice to hear from you Jinny. |
|
|
|
Keith
USA
242 Posts |
Posted - 08/28/2009 : 02:00:43 AM
|
| I actually did play a game with 5 ds in one inning. It was eight ball and I was a 5 that was learning the concept of a d. The other player was about the same level and was more experienced with the concept. In that one inning we both fought for control of pockets that the other had a ball near. My first shot at it rolled up and barely dropped. The second did the same. My captain (Billy Box) called time out and said that I should have played a d. I told him that I did and he told me to set up to try it again. I made another ball (on purpose this time) and left myself another shot at it. I passed the test this time. The other player decided to try the same thing I did. He failed the first time but was able to get it on the second try. This all happened in one inning. The only reason this happened is because we wanted to place a ball at the pocket but both struggled with the speed of the table. The reason I did not try to run out is the eight ball was in a bad spot for me but not for him. |
|
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 08/30/2009 : 10:45:21 PM
|
Hmmmmmmm, gone for a week and this interesting thread pops up. I have some input for a number of you.
Kerry - mark the D. Everyone has to do it the same way for the system to work at its best.
Movistar - a handicap system based solely on wins/losses becomes totally dependent on WHO a person plays, not HOW they play. You can't have such a system that works on a national level, because the level of competition is different in say, a rural area versus a metro area. The best player in Little Hocking, OH may be a 3, but his handicap will be much higher simply because nobody in Little Hocking can beat him.
Everyone - in an ideal world, you would be able to measure the skill of a player in every facet of the game, and it would be easy to record those facets. In the real world, however, there are things you just can't objectively measure. Take planning, for example. A player may make a great shot, but maybe they shouldn't have been shooting at that ball. Who is to say which is the correct shot in a given situation? You can't measure how often a player "gets it right", because you can't say for certain what "right" is. So, what you do is create a system based on things that CAN be measured, with adjustments for things that can affect the measurable things.
In an ideal world, everyone is honest and will tell you when they've done one of the things that can affect the measurable things. In the real world, however, not everyone will do that, so the person keeping score will have to use some judgement.
In an ideal world, we would record everything that gives us information about a player's ability, like successful defensive shots versus unsuccessful ones, which defensive shots were safeties and which were not, etc. We would also record unintentional safeties and luck shots. In the real world, we have to pick and choose what gets scored, or the scoresheet would become a book and nobody would want to play because keeping score takes the fun out of the game.
In an ideal world, the best players would be keeping score, so the subjective part of what's recorded is as accurate as it can be. In the real world, however, the best players often refuse to keep score. They would rather complain about skill levels being off than do their part to help make them more accurate.
We operate in the real world. We provide a league that's supposed to be fun, with scoresheets that aren't a nightmare to fill out, and a handicap system that is actually pretty darn fair worldwide. Two players who have never met and have zero common opponents can match up, and if they are both honest it will be a fair match. That's a pretty tall order, and I defy anyone to come up with something better. Many have tried, none have succeeded.
Phil
|
|
|
|
Moose Dragon
USA
128 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2009 : 11:25:04 AM
|
Phil
Let me get this right. If a player admits to trying to play defense and actually makes the ball and continues shooting than for that shot I mark a defense? |
|
|
|
Keith
USA
242 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2009 : 4:07:13 PM
|
| The rule is about intent. Not succeeding. If someone throws an object at you but did not hit you would you not get mad. |
|
|
|
Phil
USA
829 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2009 : 7:10:14 PM
|
quote:
[i]Originally posted by Moose Dragon[/i]
[br]Phil
Let me get this right. If a player admits to trying to play defense and actually makes the ball and continues shooting than for that shot I mark a defense?
Yep.
|
|
|
|
Moose Dragon
USA
128 Posts |
Posted - 08/31/2009 : 7:51:22 PM
|
| Okey dokey |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
match points
