Who knows for real 8ball US rules.

All I know is that you need to nominate the ball and pocket for every shot.

Sorry - a whole load of posts came in whilst writing mine

Beat me to it colins

Could the same rerack rule not be brought into Funky then - 3 fouls each - ie 6 consecutive foul shots in total means a rerack automatically?

If not 3 each then any number you want just so the game 'recognises' the scenario?

Yes that would be a good resolution to that scenario, but we seem to be going off topic a bit, though we were talking about DF's in general

lmao i thought it was the other way round - started with that scenario then drifted onto deliberate fouls in general

oh well it doesnt really matter - all interesting stuff

what about the rule if you foul you go to prison for a very long time!

Arent prisons overcrowded enough as it is?
Now then - summary executuion - thats a different thing all together

Or maybe less contoversially design a system that delivers the user an electric shock through the mouse when they foul

Edited at 14:44 Sun 11/05/08 (BST)

While I don't consider myself a top player at all, I'll be bold enough to back you up on that anyway

It *does* add to the number of tactical aspects of the game for sure. Whether or not people *like* those aspects is obviously another matter.

I disagree in your view on the rules. A foul has a defined penalty that seeks to balance how much the game should discourage a particular type of action. This is not black and white. It's not just right of wrong. It's a matter of HOW right and right.

To illustrate what I mean - if you think a foul is a bad rule violation that should have sufficiently strong penalties to make sure people were never ever to even consider doing it -> Just ban all accounts that do a foul I'm sure you agree we can't do THAT lol

In just the same way - the penalty should be balanced with how undesired a particular action is. Fouling in 8 ball is penalized fairly easily - and that's not necessarily wrong. It's what it is. And it's perfectly ok for players to foul (deliberately or not) and take the associated penalty as a result.

To me those tactical aspects are a very major part of the game. So imo it comes down to whether you like the game or not.

Edited at 15:19 Sun 11/05/08 (BST)

I guess I agree. I'd adjust to, and live with the game rules either way, but yes, more tactics is always a good thing.

To me, the most paramount part of this debate is for everyone to understand and appreciate the simple fact that you can never ever expect people not to utilize the rules to win. That's an observation of facts, not an opinion at all. Among several thousand users on a free game site, the average Joe WILL do just that - do whatever the rules allow you to do in order to make the likelyhood of winning as large as possible.

What this means is that the single issue worth discussing is whether or not to change the actual rules for the game (which in all fairness was the original topic here, so this is not meant as any sort of critique). Discussing how people perceive and/or respect the rules is utterly pointless.

Speak for yourself Smithy

(runs for cover)

I think the penalty for a foul shot is severe enough. If the incoming player is unable to take, at least, some sort of advantage of having 'ball in hand' its probably because we have gone full circle back to the beginning of this thread and the stalemate scenario!! I dont believe the incoming player should expect to return to the table after their opponent fouls and necessarily have it made easy for them.

The risk to changing the rules is that the first player to create a 'winning' position with balls covering pockets would probably win each game. That ought to be avoided.

Edited at 16:06 Sun 11/05/08 (BST)

Yes arcade, blocking pockets is already a pretty strong tactic that really doesn't need further boosting