i got to agree with jan
random shots should not happen spoiling the balls that have been hard worked into position if there needs to be a random shot it should be into a pocket

Cant really have a random shot into a pocket - pockets may be covered or the random shot would have to play an insane shot to get to a pocket

But that wouldn't be a random shot - would just be pocket shot

Ball in hand would be a lot easier than a 'random shot to pocket'

zante i wasnt offering it as an idea but it would be random one of six pokets

and it isn't impossible for all 6 to be covered
ball in hand is much more simple than potting to a pocket

ok im sure you just said that
thats why it wasnt suppose to be an idea just somthing i wrote in a sentence i am not a fan of random shots spoiling the game thats all i was saying

So why didnt you just say that or ball in hand instead of suggesting random shot into pocket - which you say isnt an idea?

The fact of the matter is most people are 100% behind random shots most of the time

If it aint broke dont fix it - and even janmb said 97% of the shots are fine

That doesnt seem broke to me, so why change it because a few people feel aggrieved?

you dont have to pick apart every bit of someones post all the time i dont think its fair to be disadvantaged by a random shot is all so it is broke a little bit or this would not happen

Im not trying to insult/offend or whatever you think im doing
Im breaking down your post so can discuss each point (like most other people are doing here)

My latest example.

I was on the black, near the middle pocket and pottable from one side. My opponent received a random. The white ended up near the far cushion, and left me a shot which, if I potted the black into the pocket down the table, the white would have dropped into the middle. A ball in hand would have left me a simple black into the middle, an ideal punishment for my opponent failing to take the shot. In the end, I had to keep the black on the table, and my opponent cleared up and won. Completely unfair.

Midgett's example on the first page about his opponent winning a 9-ball match through a combo shows just what is wrong with the random.

It might work most of the time, but there are too many flaws when it doesn't work.

i just meant if there needs to be a random shot it should not hit the balls all over for the hell of it its simply not fair

It wouldnt be a random shot if it wasnt randomly hit though

I think i know what you mean yoda
most of the time its pottable (on us table anyway) with the right spin (usually forward)

Who was to say that that wasn't the shot your opponent is going for? (a lot of the time my random shots go the exact direction i was aiming at)

What must absolutely 100% be avoided is creating a situation where it might be beneficial (certainly more beneficial than risking a random shot or even playing a deliberate foul if it meant other balls had to be moved) for someone to just let the clock expire knowing the incoming player has ball in hand in a tough, maybe even impossible position. That will just lead to a brand new complaining discussion thread as well as adding nothing to the overall gameplay experience!!

If that means the incoming player has, in addition to ball in hand, a free table and/or the right to put the opponent back in then so be it - although I would suggest that right should then exist following any foul if you go down that route.


Lets have a referendum

agree with you there chris

But is there a 100% solution?

Well I would imagine having ball in hand, free table and the right to put your opponent back in should negate any possible advantage gained from a strategy of opting not to play a shot in all the various game types. The question would be if those rights only occur after a time-out or after every foul for consistency.



Just to add I am not advocating the random shot over the automatic foul or vice-versa. I can see the benefits and disadvantages of both and wouldnt mind whatever was decided.

Edited at 18:06 Sun 23/05/10 (BST)

Because I myself committed a foul just before it, so the random just placed the white anywhere on the table and hit it right after placement.

Whether or not that's what the opponent intended doesn't really matter - they were outwith the time limit and should have been penalized, but instead it won them the game.

I think they should be scrapped, too often it benefits the person who gets the random shot when in all fairness they shouldn't be getting any benefit.

What is the official rule in real pool out of interest?

Would that still have been "completely unfair" if your opponent had played that shot?

If not, what is the difference?

If so, thats the nature of the game, and what makes it fun

So your opponent had a ball in hand anyway?

What would stop them clearing or snookering you?

I had a random shot just before when i was trying to take the shot, every time i tryed hitting it the cue would just disappear and of course i ran out of time

-current system wasn't too bad, it hit one of my colours (which surrounded the white) but didnt pot anything and opponent had plenty to shoot at

-just two shots (since it was uk) would've meant he would've been slowed right down and would've struggled to do much as couldn't benefit by potting my ball and had no shot onto his

-a little extra time for me would've meant could've taken shot eventually and not disrupted flow of game


In real pool you normally have no real limit as long as you aren't wasting time (pub pool i mean)

While I agree with the sentiment, it is really a moot point since any player already has the means to deliberately foul without touching any balls on the table.

Even if you were to turn the shot timeout into something you could "exploit" in terms of provoking a deliberate foul and ball-in-hand, you would still just give the player a tool they already have.

Besides, there is no stronger position than ball-in-hand in ANY scenario. It may be situations where you prefer to avoid the visit all together, but even then you are at least better off with a ball in hand than some other nasty position.

And with that endeth the discussion for my part. This is like punching air or trying to make a goat into a rocket scientist. I did once, but it was entirely too much work than I cared for

Since you cannot see the principal difference between a deliberate shot a player achieves vs random luck then we have nothing more to discuss here.