Hello everyone! I'm an American who is brand new to snooker. Being from the states, I have grown up playing eight and nine ball nearly exclusively, but was introduced to the game recently by a new friend of mine who is an Aussie. The first time I tried the game I instantly thought it was fantastic. To me, it has a lot of great elements from other games with some added strategy and fun due to the different point values.
I did want to ask for a clarification just to make sure I'm comprehending one of the rules correctly. There is an rule we have never employed involving a "free ball". The concept itself seems simple enough, the shooter fouls, if the opponent is "snookered", they are allowed to pot (I still have to get used to saying that) another ball. The part I wanted to clarify is the actual definition of what constitutes a "snooker". I copied this from another post which showed the "official" definition and it said the following:
The cue-ball is said to be snookered when a direct stroke in a straight line to every ball on is wholly or partially obstructed by a ball or balls not on. If one or more balls on can be struck at both extreme edges free of obstruction by any ball not on, the cue-ball is not snookered.
The first part of the statement implies after a opponent foul you would never be required to kick at the object or "on" ball, since you are supposed to be able to hit "in a straight line". Correct? When the rule states a ball is "partially" obstructed, what exactly is meant by this? Is that what they attempt to define in the second sentence talking about being able to hit BOTH "extreme edges" of the "on" ball? Because to me that means simply that there is no obstruction, either full or partial.
Any feedback is appreciated...
I did want to ask for a clarification just to make sure I'm comprehending one of the rules correctly. There is an rule we have never employed involving a "free ball". The concept itself seems simple enough, the shooter fouls, if the opponent is "snookered", they are allowed to pot (I still have to get used to saying that) another ball. The part I wanted to clarify is the actual definition of what constitutes a "snooker". I copied this from another post which showed the "official" definition and it said the following:
The cue-ball is said to be snookered when a direct stroke in a straight line to every ball on is wholly or partially obstructed by a ball or balls not on. If one or more balls on can be struck at both extreme edges free of obstruction by any ball not on, the cue-ball is not snookered.
The first part of the statement implies after a opponent foul you would never be required to kick at the object or "on" ball, since you are supposed to be able to hit "in a straight line". Correct? When the rule states a ball is "partially" obstructed, what exactly is meant by this? Is that what they attempt to define in the second sentence talking about being able to hit BOTH "extreme edges" of the "on" ball? Because to me that means simply that there is no obstruction, either full or partial.
Any feedback is appreciated...
Comment