No in the rule versions used by the people disagreeing with you, sinking an opponents ball is never a foul. If I make a legal shot on my ball, fail to sink it, and yours goes in--then it is simply your shot, however the balls lie. The requirements in these rules to make a legal shot are 1. for one of your own balls to be the first ball contacted by the cue ball (some house rules call the 8-ball "neutral" and allow that as a contact, but not in more serious play), 2. for some/any ball to contact a cushion after/ on account of (1), 3. for the cue ball to end up on the table (not in a pocket, not on the floor), 4. for the 8-ball to end up on the table unless you are on it (which of course is more than a foul, but rather game ending).

edited: I think the standard rationale would be: I sank your ball. That helps you. Why should I be punished for that? (I know it's not the only interpretation, as said below.)

Hitting an opponent's ball first, now, that is a scratch (resulting in ball in hand).

One theme that keeps coming up for 8 ball, is that somewhat peculiarly to it, failing to sink your balls can become an advantage. Reducing that effect is a common rationale for rule variations. But the counter-rationale is: well that's the game, and one can be good at working with that problem/opportunity too, why not?

Also to comment on the "ball and pocket" rule. I take and like the rationale that in straight pool, one is often shooting into a cluster where it is next to impossible to review the exact sequence of collisions. So try to avoid the problems. Sure sometimes someone will miss a straight shot and have come around 4 rails and be a lucky fluke. But that's rarer than facing next to impossible analyses of clusters. 8 ball is not as successful as avoiding this kind of issue of course b/c of its requirement to hit your own ball first--and sometimes you go right at one of yours and not yours at almost the same time (potentially I think you can usually resolve this situation by correct analysis of what the cue ball must do depending on which ball was hit first but that analysis is not always simple and two if your opponent and potentially a director are not knowledgeable enough, they may not accept the correct answer.)

PS I really like Wamy's point about keeping off the stage completely when it is not your shot.

And I also agree with others that I'd never have any expectation for someone to help me from my own error, and I certainly wouldn't ever ever complain or guilt someone for not doing it, even in a totally friendly, casual game where we had been both doing it for each other.

I agree very much with this. With anything on the line your opponent does not owe you anything and I think that telling him he should have told you in a game that was not just for fun is inappropriate. Had I been in his shoes I would have been very unhappy and gone out of my way to take your money.

Which would be nine ball. See, you're learning how the different games evolved over time.


It is when the plant is predictable, but I've seen many instances where it's just random chance and all it does is usually screw a guy out of a good shot. I guess we just come from different places on that but I see no real point in making that shot a foul. Snooker is a game that rewards making good aggressive shots to open up the pack of reds, and those shots take courage to play because if you miss the color you could well end up handing the game to your opponent. But why punish someone who makes the good courageous shot and then reward some dope who just happened to be sitting in the chair? It makes no sense and it makes the players cowards.

I mean it's like, "sorry Mr. Hendry, I know you made the amazing shot on the blue that broke open the stack and should have won you the game, millions of dollars, and broke the record for the most titles in the history of the universe, but you didn't notice that there was a triple billiard double combo kiss off set there in the stack (which had you hit the cluster two billionths of a millimetre to the left wouldn't have happened) and now you can go home and be a chump for the rest of your life. Thanks for coming out, but the title goes to Joe Shlabotnik over there, who couldn't play dead in a low-budget western."

Blech!

It could, but so could me reversing the situation by potting your ball.

Besides, if you have the talent to block the pocket, why not show some heart and go ahead and run out? Why is the dinky plug shot gaining such a huge advantage?

On a US table I'd agree, but on an English pool table I have to disagree. The pockets trap balls naturally, so long as you hit the right shot at the right speed you can hang it up pretty much every time.

So once again a good safety loses out to great shotmaking, which is how it should be. Now consider that your opponent has missed six shots in a row and hung a ball in each of the pockets, each time leaving you nothing. Is this a way that you should win an actual game between men? Come on.

I mean I can appreciate good defense as well as anyone -- I am a one pocket player after all -- but ultimately you gotta step up there and be a hero and shoot the balls in the hole.

It's like in boxing. A fighter can duck and bob all day long, but it's not going to score much. Eventually if they want to win the fight they've got to step up and hit the guy. You know what I mean?

Pfft, the US-style rules are harder, not easier, especially at eight ball. Almost without fail, if you start potting and don't get all the way out, you're likely to lose the game about every time, even to players of middle skill or worse. It doesn't get much more demanding than that.

Yep. And giving away 2 shots in the process. As there isn't ball in hand there are lots of advantages to doing this, even when giving away 2 shots.

It makes when to pot an opponents ball, and the leave associated with it a lot tougher.
I think we'll have to agree to disagree there. Its one thing to block the pocket, but another entirely to block it so there is no possible response from your opponent except to pot it.

Sounds like a fantastic (and exceptionally unlikely) strategic game played by your opponent, and he deserved to win the game. Bow to him sir

Come on, you can't have it both ways. Its either harder, or players of middle skill can easily win (when you miss a ball and hang it over the pocket).

I think is poker playing cueists, we should all convert to the rule that potting an opponents ball is a foul, and embrace the additional variance that comes with it

damn italians lol... since it is only a pub game he probably should have been more sporting and pointed out your mistake