Help advice needed

[ADR147]

[QUOTE=archalf1471;327397]once the pink was potted it was end of frame...Period.

/QUOTE]

yep. this is not even up for discussion the game was beyond the winning line what happens afterwards does not matter. and i believe it has been done by mark williams on tv when he smashed the black off the table after winning on the blue or pink.

[poolqjunkie]

1. Frame
A frame of snooker comprises the period of the play from the first stroke, with all the balls set as described in Section 3 Rule 2, until the frame is completed by:
(a) concession by any player during his turn,
(b) claim by the striker when only the Black remains and there is more than seven points difference between the scores in his favour,
(c) the final pot or foul when only the Black remains, or
(d) being awarded by the referee under Section 3 Rule 14(c) or Section 4 Rule 2.

Surely the chap who potted the pink didn't use rule 1(b) - ie he could have claimed the frame at that point - but instead went on to play the black and foul, bigbreak147 wins the frame ...

My point being rule 1(b) clearly states the player has to *claim* he's won the frame

I cant believe a discussion of this will take so long, I am sorry but I expected the members here to be more knowledgable on the game.

Yes, the game could end with 1(b), but it can also end with 1 (c), which applied in this case.

The player fouled on the black when it was the last ball remaining on the table.

You can only foul on the black ONCE*. So, the game ended right there, you got your 7 points for the foul, but you still lost.

*if the score is tied at that point, then the black is respotted, and again, you can only score once on the black, be it a foul or a pot.

[DandyA]

Yes, the game could end with 1(b), but it can also end with 1 (c), which applied in this case.

The player fouled on the black when it was the last ball remaining on the table.

You can only foul on the black ONCE*. So, the game ended right there, you got your 7 points for the foul, but you still lost.

*if the score is tied at that point, then the black is respotted, and again, you can only score once on the black, be it a foul or a pot.

very good point poolq ... I'm inclined to agree with you that 1(c) applies and not 1(b) as I thought ...

[archalf1471]

totally with adr, and poolj, and can't beleive there are people who are arguing about this to the contrary...8 up with black on end of frame....Unless you have to play for an agregate point then you play the black out.....

[DandyA]

totally with adr, and poolj, and can't beleive there are people who are arguing about this to the contrary...8 up with black on end of frame....Unless you have to play for an agregate point then you play the black out.....

you're missing the point archalf and, for that matter, I'm not sure anyone is arguing with you or anyone else on this thread - aren't we just discussing it?

bigbreak147 asked a very interesting question ... he specifically said his opponent continued to play even though the opponent was (say) 8 points up with only the black left, then fouled the black (say) meaning there was only now a 1 point difference ... and bigbreak147 potted the black ... so he asked who won?

unless you can quote what *exact* law(s) of snooker you are citing, I feel the analysis we have worked out between us is correct which is as follows ...

the frame did not end when the opponent potted the pink - he could have used rule 1(b) to claim the frame but he did not ...

however the frame did end when the opponent fouled the black on his next shot as kindly pointed out by poolq in rule 1(c) ...

so the answer, according to this analysis, is the opponent won the frame and the referee (if there was one) was incorrect to allow the game to continue after the opponent had fouled the black (although the referee was quite right to allow the opponent to continue to play after he had potted the pink) ...

you may say the difference is immaterial but, according to this analysis, the frame did not end when the opponent potted the pink - it ended when the opponent fouled the black ...

so, for instance, what would have happened if between potting the pink and fouling the black, say the opponent had a massive nose-bleed and could not continue playing or say the fire alarm sounded ...

it's actually a very very good question bigbreak asked and I think (although I'm a newbie) well worth discussing ...

I don't know if there are any referees who visit this forum but I certainly would be interested to hear if they agree with the analysis above or have a different analysis ...

If there are, my only slight niggle is why rule 1(c) says "a *final* pot" etc ... why not just "a pot" etc ... ie, is there a difference between "a final pot" and "a pot" ...

Anyway, bigbreak, I'm feeling you lost the frame due to poolq's statement the frame ended when your opponent fouled the black as per 1(c) ... however, it did not end when your opponent potted the pink as they did not claim the win as required by 1(b) as many others on this thread have said ...

Sorry ... better luck next time

[poolqjunkie]

It says the final pot being the last black left on the table when the score was more than 7 points in difference or the final pot of the re-spotted black--either way, you are only supposed to score on the black once to end the frame.

This is to prevent a frame to go on forever which could happen if a player is allowed to keep trying to make his opponent foul on the black more than once when he is down more than 7 points with only the black left on the table.

In reality, a player would conceed if he is down by more than 7 points and the pink is sunk by his opponent, because he could not win no matter what at this point. This is seen quite often in tournaments. So, even if a player is not able to continue shooting for whatever reason, the game is won once the pink is sunk. It is because at this point the opponent would have no chance of winning whatever due to 1(c).

Hope this is clear for you now.

[DandyA]

In reality, a player would conceed if he is down by more than 7 points and the pink is sunk by his opponent, because he could not win no matter what at this point. This is seen quite often in tournaments. So, even if a player is not able to continue shooting for whatever reason, the game is won once the pink is sunk. It is because at this point the opponent would have no chance of winning whatever due to 1(c).

poolq ... you may well say that we're splitting hairs here but my point remains (thanks to your fine analysis) that the frame did not end until bigbreak's opponent fouled the black ...

In reality, a player would conceed if he is down by more than 7 points and the pink is sunk by his opponent, because he could not win no matter what at this point.

isn't it against the rules to conceed when your opponent is at the table? I certainly remember the WPBSA getting quite arsey about this with Ronnie ... and anyway, there is no rule to say bigbreak147 had to conceed ...

So, even if a player is not able to continue shooting for whatever reason, the game is won once the pink is sunk. It is because at this point the opponent would have no chance of winning whatever due to 1(c).

well that's not what rule 1(c) actually says ... it says the frame is ended when "a final pot or foul is made on the black" ... it does not say "the frame is ended when your opponent pots the pink and you have no chance of winning" ...

sorry to be pedantic and I think you did a great job pointing out that 1(c) applied when bigbreak's opponent fouled the black

[poolqjunkie]

This incident is really not that uncommon, and is really not so complicated. When the pink is sunk, no matter what happens with the black, it is understood and commonly accepted that the game is over. It is because you can only score on the black once, so there is not enough points for you to win no matter what. You can wait for him to shoot the black, and then shake his hand no matter whether he made it, foul it or whatever. There is no point for you to continue shooting the black since you cant win anyway.

I can't believe this thread goes on for three pages. But when i reread the rules you quoted, trying to see how I could make it easier for you to understand, I noticed that 1(b) actually implies that if there are more than 7 points difference on the table and only black remains, then the frame is over.

I am not a lawyer and I am not going to play word games here. I will take it that you are new to the game, so i have tried to explain it to you. As you play this game longer, you will find that this is really quite uncomplicated and easy to follow. If you need more than 7 points to win, and only black is left on the table, then you have lost the game.

[archalf1471]

poolq ... you may well say that we're splitting hairs here but my point remains (thanks to your fine analysis) that the frame did not end until bigbreak's opponent fouled the black ...



isn't it against the rules to conceed when your opponent is at the table? I certainly remember the WPBSA getting quite arsey about this with Ronnie ... and anyway, there is no rule to say bigbreak147 had to conceed ...



well that's not what rule 1(c) actually says ... it says the frame is ended when "a final pot or foul is made on the black" ... it does not say "the frame is ended when your opponent pots the pink and you have no chance of winning" ...

sorry to be pedantic and I think you did a great job pointing out that 1(c) applied when bigbreak's opponent fouled the black

no its not against the rules to conceed when your opponent is at the table, just "poor form" "badsportsmanship" call it what you will...

[ADR147]

no its not against the rules to conceed when your opponent is at the table, just "poor form" "badsportsmanship" call it what you will...

we have all done it though! - what to think of with this rule to make it easier is that the claim is automatic.

[The Statman]

you're missing the point archalf and, for that matter, I'm not sure anyone is arguing with you or anyone else on this thread - aren't we just discussing it?

bigbreak147 asked a very interesting question ... he specifically said his opponent continued to play even though the opponent was (say) 8 points up with only the black left, then fouled the black (say) meaning there was only now a 1 point difference ... and bigbreak147 potted the black ... so he asked who won?

unless you can quote what *exact* law(s) of snooker you are citing, I feel the analysis we have worked out between us is correct which is as follows ...

the frame did not end when the opponent potted the pink - he could have used rule 1(b) to claim the frame but he did not ...

however the frame did end when the opponent fouled the black on his next shot as kindly pointed out by poolq in rule 1(c) ...

The exact rule in question is the one that Robert602 quoted in the third post of this thread.

When only balck remains, the first score or foul ends the frame, full stop. His opponent had potted the pink, and then played the black and fouled. That was the 'first foul ending the frame'.

The exceptions in the rule, which both have to be met are, when the scores are then equal (which does not apply) and if aggregate scores are not relevant.

you may say the difference is immaterial but, according to this analysis, the frame did not end when the opponent potted the pink - it ended when the opponent fouled the black ...

Exactly right

so, for instance, what would have happened if between potting the pink and fouling the black, say the opponent had a massive nose-bleed and could not continue playing or say the fire alarm sounded ...

Then someone would "claim the frame because he is more than 7 in front on the black" (Rule 1b quoted earlier).

[The Statman]

This incident is really not that uncommon, and is really not so complicated. When the pink is sunk, no matter what happens with the black, it is understood and commonly accepted that the game is over. It is because you can only score on the black once, so there is not enough points for you to win no matter what. You can wait for him to shoot the black, and then shake his hand no matter whether he made it, foul it or whatever. There is no point for you to continue shooting the black since you cant win anyway.

I can't believe this thread goes on for three pages. But when i reread the rules you quoted, trying to see how I could make it easier for you to understand, I noticed that 1(b) actually implies that if there are more than 7 points difference on the table and only black remains, then the frame is over.

I think the point here is that, a player who pots the pink may be on for a high break (maybe not a high break but his personal best, perhaps, or he just wants the satisfaction of the clearance). So the game is not, per se, over when he pots the pink because it is still his turn.

But if he wants, he can 'claim the frame' and not bother with the black.

isn't it against the rules to conceed when your opponent is at the table? I certainly remember the WPBSA getting quite arsey about this with Ronnie ... and anyway, there is no rule to say bigbreak147 had to conceed ...

Indeed. This is not about the guy in the chair conceding because he can't win (as you say he cannot concede while his opponent is in play).

It is about the guy at the table claiming the frame because he can't lose.

[archalf1471]

i appreciate your points statman and all those others before, regardless of rule x,y,z or whatever as far as I and the majority of players on here would be concerned who play the game now for fun as soon as that pink hit the pocket and white has come to rest on the bed of the table and you are more than 7 ahead...that is it end of frame

If you started anything other than that and try to use xyz to claim the frame then you ( not personally) would be ducking a flying white ball and the butt end of my cue.........or am I missing the point?

[dannyd0g]

I think the point here is that, a player who pots the pink may be on for a high break (maybe not a high break but his personal best, perhaps, or he just wants the satisfaction of the clearance). So the game is not, per se, over when he pots the pink because it is still his turn.

But if he wants, he can 'claim the frame' and not bother with the black.Indeed. This is not about the guy in the chair conceding because he can't win (as you say he cannot concede while his opponent is in play).

It is about the guy at the table claiming the frame because he can't lose.

What about all the times the likes of Ronnie and Mark Williams have smashed the final black onto the floor, or some other foul, to complete their clearances.

These fouls never loose the frame, so the rule must only apply if there are less than 7 points in it on the final black ?

[archalf1471]

Now that would make for entertaining TV....Mark thwacks the black all over the floor and Ronnie tries to claim the frame......Be different

Don't know why i am taking part in this discussion as its largely academic, the way I am playing the likelihood of me having a pink/black ball game with anyone other than the family goldfish is highly unlikely!!!!