back to what you said before then - agree to differ and move on

for me it was a resonable option to have given the circumstances i was in - its a bit like an aircraft autopilot - better to let that fly the plane if i was indisposed than to definitely crash and burn

If we were to adopt that line of thought, there can be no fair option, as the moment something favours one player over the other, it is by definition no longer fair.

Lets never forget, if you do not take your shot in the alloted time, you incur a random shot penalty.

Even in the extremely rare incidence that said random shot wins a game for the player, they were still penalised in that they did not get to take the shot they wanted.

After the player has incurred the penalty, the outcome is random, in other words, 50/50 that it may result in a situation advantageous to one player or the other.

As I said, I've yet to see, and doubt we will see, a more fair suggestion than 50/50.

If I might just ask a question in the middle of this.

How is the 'random shot' actually calculated?

Just HOW random is it?

Or is there a set number of power/direction combinations that can be used?

Forgive me if this sounds odd.

Aha, so we do agree it is, and should be, considered a penalty then?

A penalty is something you get for doing something wrong.

And fair doesn't mean 50/50. Fair means placing the consequences with the player who has the responsibility.

Of course I don't know how Nick has implemented it, but based on observation, common sense, how *I* would do it etc etc, this is how it works...

In no significant order:

- You generate a random number between 0 and 359 and use as your angle (or 0..6.28 radians or whatever unit of measure you use)

- You generate a random number between 0 and 100 and use as your power (percentage or bams if you will)

The units may not be accurate, but the principle is the same.


As for randomness on a computer... For all practical purposes you can regard it as perfect. Since you can't really ask a computer to give you something coincidental, randomness is emulated by feeding a seed (typically temperature, time, etc etc) into a rather messy and large formula which outputs a VERY VERY long sequence of numbers where none of them in any way is based on the previous results.

Whether Nick has chosen to add further rules limiting the range of the random shots I do not know, but I strongly doubt it.

Edited at 22:44 Wed 27/05/09 (BST)

Yeah that makes sense.

I was just interested as I'd never really thought about it before.

Thanks Jan.

Exactly, the random shot is a penalty you incur when your shot is not taken within the time limit, the outcome of that penalty in irrelevant and should not favour either player.



Since the penalty has already been incurred, both players deserve an equal, and therefore fair, chance of a positive or negative outcome.

Automatic foul everytime. The shot clock is there for a reason, if you don't play shot within the time limit then it's a foul surely? Otherwise why bother with the shot clock!

Uhm, Dave, with respect, what on earth are you smoking? Old socks? They are not healthy you know

Seriously though, a penalty means a punishment. Which implies something wrong has been committed. By one of the two players.

Are you seriously saying that the penalty one player incurs should affect both players equally?

I REALLY hope I'm misunderstanding something here, otherwise this is worse than I thought.

My understanding is that spinner is saying the player himself is suffering the penalty because its not the shot that he necessarily would have played - thats what he clearly said before anyway and im sure he will correct me if im wrong. As far as the other player is concerned a shot is played and that is all that ought to concern him/her - the odds are obviously that it will be a foul or at least beneficial to the incoming player - but if it isnt so be it.

You still have not answered my point about opting to have the pc play your shot on your behalf. Why would you expect me to put the phone on hold (even though i couldnt) just to make sure i definitely avoid a foul shot when i know the random is an option that will play a shot that may be a good and valid one that could easily buy me an extra 30 seconds to a minute? Why should the opponent benefit wholly 100%? Autoplays or autocontinues exist in computer games and in my opinion rightly so.

The shot clock exists to move the game along - as you cannot stipulate that THE player must play THE shot within 20 seconds then there can be no grounds for calling that a rule which is enforcable or punishable in the same way as a normal foul shot. On this game a foul can genuinely only be called on the facts of the shot played (however its played) eg did it connect with the correct ball first, was an incorrect ball pocketed, did the white hit anything or did it scratch.

Because you are the one neglecting your game.

Plain and simple.


To get out of this endless debate and head towards something remotely resembling a conclusion:

- There are two fundamentally different views on what a shot timeout really means - whether it is a fault or neglected responsibility from the active player, or a perfectly legitimate way of making your shot.

- There are pretty much 50/50 between those who want to keep random shot vs. those who'd welcome a change to automatic foul.

Up to Nick how to interpret this, the player base is clearly divided.

Edited at 22:28 Thu 28/05/09 (BST)

or opting to let the pc play my shot because i dont have a.n.other to play it on my behalf like someone else might have.

diversity is everything

nice summary jan

In pool, if your time runs out like in the mosconi cup, does the referee pick up the white and chuck it across the table and the players hopes for the best. I think not, however that would be good to see.

ahh but likewise if you nipped off to toilet or make a phone call could your mate come down from the cheap seats and play the shot for you?

The simple answer to that is yes. See that happen all the time.

Seriously though, do you ever see them pop off half way through a game. They go at the end of the game, which does make sense to be fair.

So you can't add that to the equations as it does not happen in the real format of pool.

no but it can happen on here and theres nothing you can do to stop it

so back to my original point - why differentiate between that and a pc random shot?

to say 'because you can' is a weak excuse and not treating everyone fairly - and to treat everyone fairly and equally should be the aim of any game

Because you can

Good point though, i am in total favour of the shot being handed over to the opponent with the choice of putting them back in, however the putting them back in is more suited to snooker as you wouldn't do it on here, well very rarely anyway.

Nope, its dead simple, as Chris already pointed out.

The penalty incurred is the loss of opportunity to take the shot you would have done.

The outcome is, and should be, entirely independant.

Think of it like a a flight...

You are held up, for whatever reason, your own fault, a techinical problem, other peoples influences or whatever, an you miss your flight.

That, there, is your penalty. You dont get to be on the flight you wanted.

However, say there is a rare event and the plane crashes. That means the outcome is actually in your favour.

Does that mean it's your fault the plane crashed?

Ah, that's more in line with what I expected to hear from you - I was worried there for a second, almost sounded like you were agreeing with me that letting the time run out should be considered a rule violation.

Me? Agree? Never (spinner circa 2005 is still in here somewhere )

To me the current shot clock is a funkypool (site) mechanism to keep things moving and prevent abusive users walking away when in a losing position.

Therefore a site penalty is incurred.

As a lifetime 10sec player, I would be all for a "Speed pool/snooker" game type, where the shot clock was part of the game rules (and therefore failure to play constitutes a foul).

But effectively imposing that on all players for all games right now is unfair IMO.

I see no reason, as time progresses and the site grows, why such rules shouldnt be implimented to reflect real life. Premier league pool events, Snooker 6's etc.