Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tossing a coin in a re-spot

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Tossing a coin in a re-spot

    I've been thinking about this, and I find tossing a coin to see who gets put in first to be a very arbitrary method of deciding who gets to go first. For instance, a player can make a decent break, miss and the other fella equalizes but yet is forced to relinquish control of the table just because he's run out of balls. The first player came off because he missed, but the second player has to come off because he potted all the balls??

    Does anyone find this sits uneasily within the overall structure of the game? I reckon if the score is equal, the black should just go back on its spot and the player who potted it should contine with his turn from where the white finished.

    Anyone think it is a good of fairer idea?
    Tags: None
  • #2
    I've read, re-read, and read again this post, and it still makes no sense to me. Exactly what game are you playing with regards to this post???

    Comment

    • #3
      You've never heard of a re-spot??

      Well basically, when the scores are equal the black is re-spotted and a coin toss determines who gets to go first. The most famous example of this was probably during the 1998 Masters final between Mark Williams and Stephen Hendry.

      Comment

      • #4
        I think he was just trying to be clever.

        A coin is fair because both players have scored the same points. If someone makes a 75 clearance to tie with 75 on the table then he knows that only perfection will allow him the opportunity for a re-spot because player 1 has obviously had the better of the first part of the frame. If he's 74 behind and has to take a pink it's his own fault for not getting on the black to enable a clear win.

        Anyway, who's to say it's an advantage to go first? It would take away the mind games side of a re-spot. What if you'd rather put your opponent in but you've potted the last black?

        Comment

        • #5
          Sorry, can't say i've ever seen it happen or been in that situation.

          If it's skill rather than a toss of the coin that should determine who goes first, why not use the lag technique?

          For those that don't know what the lag is, both players shoot from the baulk line, bank their ball off the foot rail and try and get their own ball to stop on or closest to the head rail. This is the method used to determine who gets to break first in nineball tournaments.
          Would this be fairer than a toss of the coin?

          Comment

          • #6
            The idea of tossing a coin to decide who plays first on a re-spot is surely fairer that the situation which occured in a qualifier at Plymouth a few years back when Mike Hallett played Brian Morgan when Morgan went in-off the black which left the scores level.
            The black finished close to a baulk pocket and Hallett insisted the cue-ball should be placed in the D and the black stay over the pocket.
            Obviously any fool knows that the black should be replaced on its spot in such an instance and the tie breaker re-spot should come into effect.
            Many thought that Hallett had pulled a stroke on both his inexperienced referee and Morgan who was ravaged bu Chicken Pox at that particular time.
            Now that IS unfair..................
            Snooker is a game which is possessed by demonic forces..........

            Comment

            • #7
              No, it's not fair. But i'd be blaming the referee.

              To truly eliminate and chances a result seeming unfair. Why aren't the players just made to replay the frame?
              If a player comes from a long way behind to tie the scores, doesn't said player deserve the right to play for a win, rather than lose because of the toss of a coin?
              Skill, not luck!

              Comment

              • #8
                Good idea Snazzy!

                Comment

                • #9
                  Originally Posted by DrSmunge
                  The idea of tossing a coin to decide who plays first on a re-spot is surely fairer that the situation which occured in a qualifier at Plymouth a few years back when Mike Hallett played Brian Morgan when Morgan went in-off the black which left the scores level.
                  The black finished close to a baulk pocket and Hallett insisted the cue-ball should be placed in the D and the black stay over the pocket.
                  Obviously any fool knows that the black should be replaced on its spot in such an instance and the tie breaker re-spot should come into effect.
                  Many thought that Hallett had pulled a stroke on both his inexperienced referee and Morgan who was ravaged bu Chicken Pox at that particular time.
                  Now that IS unfair..................
                  that's got to be seen as a refereeing error because judging by his commentary it wouldn't surprise me if Hallett really thought that was the rule. He probably also thinks it's a 2 point foul on the yellow.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    As a referee, although not in the rules, I was advised that it is standard practice to offer the call to whomever did not call at the start of the match.

                    Then each subsequent re-spot, in the same match, would be called alternately by each player.

                    Very rarely is the re-spotted black potted on the first shot, so any advantage in going first or second is, technically at least, negligible.

                    Comment

                    Previous template Next
                    Working...
                    X