When you examine the pucks in slow motion at 60 fps, it clearly shows that the pucks enter a quantum wave state where they are in all possible positions simultaneously. They are both touching and not touching at the same time until motion stops and wave state collapses into a final position.
At 8:06 where you mention sliding the button under your finger and not letting go until it lands in the 20. Our club has adopted an understanding amongst players that when performing a shot the finger can move but the wrist must stay stationary, thus eliminating the ability to give it some extra 'push'. Interesting debate about the push shot itself (where the finger and both buttons are touching simultaneously). In snooker, when the cue ball is touching an object ball, any subsequent contact with the cue on the cue ball would be considered an illegal shot, thus the remedy for that is the player must shoot away from where the cue ball and object ball are touching. You can't really shoot away from that situation in crokinole because you'll just end up in the ditch. Not sure how to work around that one. My advice is to keep it simple lol in my experience, new players are often put off if they feel there are too many 'rules' and 'what-ifs'
Recently found this channel and love it. I completely agree with your spirit of the rules. It’s all about enforceability and ease of enforcing the rules.
Thank you Jeremy. Once again, your most recent video has immediately prompted Garth and me into discussion and ... yes, another spontaneous hour of happy flicking. Enjoying reading others comments and feedback.
For the very reason that you explained about not having rules to cover these shooting situations, makes in necessary for a game with a governing body to set such rules.
Everything is fun and games until something is really on the line and at that point the rules need to be clear. I have played 8 ball and 9 ball in the APA (American Poolplayers Association, there is a Canadian version as well) for about 15 years. When you get to league night in regular season some people are easy going, some are sticklers. Playoffs get tense, Tri Cup and LTC, which determines what teams get a paid trip to Vegas, are very tense where you always have a someone waiting for an inadvertent rule violation in addition to the simple fact that with all on the line nobody wants to be out due to a misinterpretation. The problems described here are very similar to what is seen in billiards. Push shots in pool mean that your cue is in contact with the cue ball and drives it through its contact with the object ball, pushing both together. That is a no no and it typically happens when they are so close that the cue cannot be drawn back fast enough, usually because the cue ball and object ball are simply too close or even touching. In pool the way to counter this is to shoot "away" at a tangential angle to avoid this or to shoot sharply down and into the table. Shooting down in crokinole is impossible so I would say shoot "away" to prevent the push shot IF PUSH SHOTS ARE TO BE ILLEGAL IN CROKINOLE. Frankly I don't think we should bother with them being illegal in crokinole. The rule can be a real bear to deal with in pool and I say if it isn't already illegal in crokinole already then don't confuse things. PUSH SHOTS IN CROKINOLE: PUSH SHOTS IN CROKINOLE SHOULD BE LEGAL. Double hits in pool, where the cue ball comes back and hits the shooter's cue, are a scratch in pool, giving "ball in hand" to the opponent. There is no ball to place in hand for crokinole so I say simply make it a lost disc. In fact I say make this simple and address both the double hit and the "accidental contact." In APA league play if the shooter accidentally contacts any ball other than the cue ball on the table the opponent gets to place it back where they choose. In higher stakes league this can get truly nasty where the opponent has the right to place that contacted ball anywhere to tremendous advantage. In normal play we simply place it back where it was last. For crokinole I say we look at it in a similar way. ACCIDENTAL CONTACT IN CROKINOLE: IF ANY DISC CONTACTS THE PLAYER AFTER THEY MAKE THEIR SHOT (SHOOTING DISC LEAVES THEIR FINGER) THEN THE OPPONENT GETS TO PLACE IT WHERE THEY CHOOSE ANYWHERE FLAT ON THE BOARD OR IN THE DITCH BUT NOT IN THE 20 HOLE. This can be really punishing but the answer is, get your hand clear! As far as the nonsensical idea of sliding the disc all the way to the twenty hole simply make a rule stating THE PLAYER'S UPPER ARM MAY NOT MOVE DURING THEIR SHOT. If your fingers are moving your upper arm shouldn't be and if you are sliding the disc they your upper arm is moving and therefore you are not shooting. Finally there is the last resort used in tournaments when money or positions are on the line, call for a third party observer.
First, I really love that you approached this problem with the scientific method. As someone with a science background, I really appreciate that. Second, I have no problem with the shot you are talking about. I don't understand the controversy involved in this issue. It's a rare occurrence and I've never seen anyone argue over it... but maybe I just haven't been playing long enough or in large enough circles for this to matter. I also love that the rules are designed not to be fought over, I vote to keep things mostly as they are. The one thing I might add is that they might include the definition of a "flick" or what constitutes a flick for the official rules. Third and most importantly, let me just say that I am changing my club name to "The Douchey Russian Bots." Well done sir, well done!
Hello Jeremy. I have been looking into getting a board, and have started watching a lot of your content. I wonder about pushing a button from the top. Have you recorded the amount of time a finger is in contact with a button when pushed from the top, versus flicking from behind? I would guess the length of time the finger is in contact in both cases, is tied to the reach of the finger. I would guess, it's about the same amount of time in both cases. Thanks all the variety of video delving into the game!
I have not recorded that. when folks ask me if that is a legal way to shoot my response is that I don't know for sure that it is illegal per se but I do feel that the ceiling of skill is extremely low when you shoot this way. On day one you may have more success but in the long run (not even long run, even after a few games I think) the better way to go is to dial in the flick. try different fingers, thumb vs no thumb etc. check out our video on how to flick your disc where we go through a lot of options
@@TraceyBoardsGreat discussion. I agree that no rule change is needed. Current rules state “A disc must be struck by one or more fingers. No aids, such as finger guards, are permitted.” When I’ve played with people who want to put their finger on top of the disc to “slide” it, this is the rule I refer to. Placing your finger on top of the disc is not a “strike” of the disc. Theoretically you could strike the disc from the top in such a manner, so I would not be opposed to verbiage regarding striking the curved portion of the disk or something to that effect. I also believe that the “struck” language eliminates the debate regarding a push. Strikes can take place with different amounts of force and energy; however, it would seem to me that once that force or energy comes to rest, it ceases to be a strike. In the case of a flicking “strike” in crokinole, the strike begins when the finger makes contact with the disc and ends when the finger is extended. The more I consider this, I wouldn’t mind seeing language regarding a “flick” being added to the rules as it might more clearly allude to what I believe is the spirit of the “struck” terminology as it currently reads. The dictionary definition of a flick being, “the sudden release of a bent finger or thumb, especially to propel a small object.”
Near the start of the video you make a distinction between this shot and a "double hit". What would a double hit be? I can't find any mention of the term online. Is it the same as in pool, except with your finger instead of the cue?
If the shooter disc bounces back from a nearby hit and hits your finger. I say simply treat it like any accidental contact between the shooter’s hand and any disc on the board after making the shot; the opponent gets to decide where the disc which hit the finger goes, anywhere but the 20 hole. Put it in the ditch, put it hidden, whatever. The simply fact is the shooter is responsible for not getting their hand clear. Problem solved.
Everyone is going to hate me for this one. But I refreshed myself with "Newtons Law Applied to Collisions" And every time we flick a buttons thats together or touching we are actually pushing them. When they are apart the only reason why some buttons tend to keep moving after they are hit, is because they are not all the same. Each button does not have the exact same mass and structure and dencity. Which leads up to "Newtons Second Law" which pertains to behaviour of an object for which all existing forces are not balanced. Dam... Physics is everywhere.
You are absolutely correct that if they touch there is a push. In billiards we can end up in such a situation through no fault of our own. In Crokinole you can set it up. Either way declaring push or no push has many times ground games to a vault in my pool league. Better to simply say there is NO RULE against pushing in Crokinole. You can and I can, any advantage is equal and simply move on.
If A starts with velocity v (vector) and A hits B (identical to A) which is stationary, then A stops and B moves with velocity v ONLY if the line connecting their centers is in line with A's original direction of motion. This is a direct result of the laws of conservation of momentum and energy. Ignoring those pesky critters known as friction, sound, heat, and other energy losses such as deformation effects. However, If A strikes B off-center then both will continue to move. But you know that since it's the base of carom shots. Be careful when applying physics since simple analysis of collisions typically is based on "assume the chicken is a sphere of zero radius".
I would like to see a rule added. Which will help with the pushing or flicking of a button. "The palm of your hand must not move in making a shot" This will allow someone who is using a pushing motion rather than a flicking motion not to have an unfair advantage. When I play a game, I have never allowed a player to put his finger on top of the button and push it. But I have seen a lot a new players when they flicking a button tend to use a forward motion of their wrist and flicking action together which is more like an extended push combined with a flick. But then again maybe we should not change anything. There are enough rules in the world. Maybe we should use just common sense.
that is very interesting. I like the way you are thinking. I have seen folks flick the button by moving their arm who do it in a short enough burst that they aren't staying in contact with the disc any longer than a traditional flicker but I am still OK with the wording of your rule suggestion. One of the reasons I am OK with it is because I think that this rule will actually help new players avoid that technique which I feel has an extremely low ceiling.
The people I play with say you can't be touching the disk after it leaves the shooting line. It's sometimes hard to tell but at least it's a firm rule.
I was thinking similarly, but would go with wrist instead of palm. It's a bit more flexible on hand positions and shooting styles as well as more natural to setup with your wrist as an anchor, to use an archery term. It's also easier to see as the shooter's palm is face down. Anchoring from archery is a useful concept that I've applied to Crokinole and as Jeremy pointed out this could be used to help me players get into the game faster. I think there does need to be a rule to this effect, but hopefully we can use it as a positive rather than a barrier to new players, like a rule about double hits or pushing might by being obscure or overly specific.
@@TraceyBoards Yes - I've seen this in new players as well and it leads to extremely inconsistent shots. But, should we build rules around requiring players to play in a way that increases their ceiling based on what is "typically true"? I'm not so sure. I'm willing to be there is SOMEONE out there whose shot is better becuase they are able to move their arm while they shoot. It's not me, and I'm convinced anchoring your hand somehow is the best method, but, people are weird - there's gotta be someone.
As a casual player who plays with people who like to bend the rules, I’ve always just had a policy that you’ll know it when you see it if anyone tries to go too far by making their flick an extended push. This works great but I do feel like a rule for flicking would be helpful so I can cite an actual reason why I won’t allow someone to shoot a certain way.
I have a question: Can I purposefully miss to mitigate the risk of only hitting my own discs and having them all eliminated? When I say purposefully miss, I mean literally flicking no where near the discs.
Watch me get hate mail.... Absolutely. That's a strategic tactic. It's just an invalid shot and the disc gets put in the ditch. Also, why flick when you can just "trough" the shot. (directly place your disc in the ditch without shooting). As the rules currently sit, there is no rule against that.
@@roycampbell2467 I've just been playing and three of my discs in the 15 and one of the opponents. Why would I ever try and shoot and risk all of my discs being put in the gutter when I'm currently on top with points. OK, I'll just gutter it in future without even shooting.
I agree - no need for a rule change. This is a helpful video in thinking through a complex situation, but honestly I have to wonder how often this will really come into play, especially in a competitive game. I can't imagine that most players are going to go for a shot where the 2 discs are touching and shoot them both in a virtually identical direction rather than (if it's an opponents disc) move the shooter off to the side and go for a ricochet hide or 20 while getting the off on the opponents disc. Even in the shot that led to this video when it was his own disc, it clearly didn't pan out and the only reason it was taken was because it was, to quote Jeremy, an "inconsequential" shot. Apparently this is a more common issue than I've encountered if it was brought up and has been questioned - but - strategically, wouldn't this be extremely rare? Or - are shots like this common place because you have a shot at a 20 and leaving a disc in the 15?
you have official instigated a follow up video :-). I figured there would be one anyway after enough folks shared their thoughts but now I am thinking we will do a video about why on earth a player would ever want to do this. So thank you!
As with pool, if one ball hits another where the center of both the hit and incoming ball are in line with the direction of travel (and without any appreciable spin), you will have a transfer of kinetic energy between the incoming ball and the ball that gets hit (balls of same size, same mass). Any time you have both disks traveling together in essentially a straight line parallel to the incoming disk, you've pushed both disks. You're essentially shooting two disks at once. That does seem unfair to me. If the two disks don't hit "directly" (i.e., both centers on the line of the direction of travel of the incoming disk), then kinetic energy is split between the two disks, but they will be diverging away from the point of contact. That's a not-all-that-well explained, semi-technical explanation, but I think the key is whether your finger is ever transferring energy to two different disks simultaneously. I think the rule could simply be "You cannot push two disks." Flicking one disc into another is fine, but you can't push more than one disc. Do that experiment with the vector math and I think you will find that there is this big transfer of energy with fair hits. When they hit "obliquely", there is still a big energy transfer and the total kinetic energy of the system just after the hit does not change. That should sum up very differently than two-disc pushes/flicks. With some good camera work, you can show the vector equations and total energy in the system just after an oblique hit. Perhaps to make the rule more memorable, you could call it the 'electrocution rule': if your finger ever touches the disk you are shooting and another disc simultaneously, you get "electrocuted". Such things are too hard to try to undo: I think the penalty should be essentially the same as if you fail to hit your opponents disc: yours goes in the gutter, the rest of the board remains. Maybe if they do it twice in the same game, on the second time their one disc goes in the gutter plus another one? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elastic_collision
Some rules clarify - some rules only cause more confusion in how to apply them. I think one trying to address this issue would likely end in the latter category. You would also need a rule to say what happens if there is an "illegal" shot. Lose your turn and set disc in gutter? Shoot again? Were discs hit and the same debate of where were they at the start? It's all so complicated - sigh.
I think you've hit on a good point, it might need to borrow from snooker where the ref needs to replace the buttons. This could pose an issue for non tournament games but it does not stop pub snooker.
Love the thinking: rules should make the game easy to understand and play with the fewest possible arguments. Simple rules keep crokinole fun. Regarding the flick vs. push example, don't forget about rule 7e: "A disc must be struck by one or more fingers..." To me, the word "struck" means that the contact must be a momentary strike, not an extended push. If this becomes a significant point of discussion, the ruling body might look at a similar example from the rules of volleyball, which requires a contact to be quick and not extended (e.g. a hit, not a catch-and-throw). Regarding the original shot in question, if slow-motion cameras cannot even show whether a double hit occurred, then we certainly don't need a rule that players have to interpret from real-time observation. A standard striking shot should be good enough.
I mentioned in another comment that the way I've seen it ruled is your finger must be off the disk by the time it leaves the shooting line. That way you don't need to worry about a strike vs a push, you have a clear line.
@@2ndpersonplural652 I appreciate the attempt at clarity. On paper that seems like a clear rule, but in practice it would be impossible to police. Just like the examples of the damage rule or spinning disc, it is impossible to clearly argue what happened in the past. "I was behind the line" - "No you weren't". Not sure what the answer is.
@@PhilHenDrums I don't see how this much different than a foot-fault in tennis. Not easily called and when called by the other player, first time is generally a warning.
There's no rule on how far you can be in contact with the disc? :O - Well obviously this needs to be added. Perhaps that your palm size from the ditch wall? Hmm... I'll get back to this (got my board today).
no question there are some rules that rely on common sense and sportsmanship amongst the competitors. I always say I look forward to seeing this sport reach new levels and also hope it holds onto it wholesome roots. That will be a tough balance but here's hoping we can find it. Just hoping it doesn't require a rule book that is 3 inches thick and leads to people arguing instead of just enjoying the greatest game on earth :-)
I don't consider that a double hit and I feel like it would be a bit petty to call it one if they are using ONE flicking motion. I don't see how a "double hit" during a shot would even matter, if anything, it would throw your shot off. One single motion is good enough for me even if technically a double hit actually occurs. That leaves me to a question and a possible rule. Are you allowed to actually put the shooting disc in contact with a dics on the board and that close to the shooting line? If so, perhaps a rule to state that you cannot place a shooting disc in contact with a disc in play. One for sure rules addition should be that my 20s actually count as 30.
Every game works with a very small number of rules as long as the last rule is understood to be "and don't be a jerk about it" and the player base is cool enough to observe it. Crokinole should work this way to. Down the path of rules lawyers lies madness.
I have no qualms with the buttons touching. But I do have an opinion about there being no rule inhibiting a player from maintaining finger contact for as long as they want. You often talk about making use of strategy within the rules. Well good strategy (whether it is booed by others or you get called names or not) would be to push the button into the center as you demonstrated or push the button into the other players button and continue until it is off the board. So yes why not have a rule such as > your body can only be in contact for a maximum of a half second (or whatever is an appropriate time amount)
Why not implement a rule that says your finger cannot remain in contact with the button once the button fully passes the shooting line or a set length past the shooting line? It would really only need be applied if people are abusing the game and very obviously pushing the button. It kind of seems to accomplish what is required without being too in the way. What do people think?
The "set length" beyond the shooting line would invite unresolvable argument about that measurement. Similar to "one disc width" separation that can't really be measured without possibly changing the game state. I'm with the group desiring the fewest, simplest, least debatable rules. Part of what makes Crokinole so great is the honorable approach the playing community holds.
while i really like crokinole pool is my favorite game of all time and both a push and a double hit are fouls. In a ball in hand situation you wouldnt be allowed to put the cue ball or in this case a disc down touching another ball/disc it would be a foul which i think makes sense here also your touching a disc thats in play but when a cueball is close to the ball your shooting you have to either elevate your cue which isnt possible here or shoot at an angle as to not double hit or push but it eventually comes down to the judgment of the person asked to watch the hit. To keep the rules simple i think saying atleast a disc away is fair it might not be exact but your opponent could ask you to put a disc between if they think its close and having a double hit would probably be very hard at the distance and be pretty obvious.
Dan Hepburn "trouble maker, problem child, whatever" Jeremy, you are pretty much like everyone else. You have a right to your own opinion, that is, as long as you agree with me. Therefore, in this instance you have a right to your opinion. Put another way, you got it right. Congratulations!!!!
I'm thinking the game needs 2 official refs with long craps sticks that block and move your buttons around the board. You can never play the game with no less then 2 refs.
I really don’t feel the need for a rule change. Even if the shooter touches the other disc(s), does it make it necessarily an easier shot? 🤔 I don’t think it’s easier than having a shot at an opened 20. In my humble opinion! Because there is another disc involved, there is some variables that are going to affect the way the disc travels! If a player does it against me... I fist bump and say « Good shote mate! » As long as he/she doesn’t move the other disc while trying to set his shooter up! 🤷🏼♂️ I can’t see any problems with that shot, I would let it be! 👌🏼☺️ As for the motion... Common sens that if the player is deliberately moving the disc as to cheat or to gain an unfair advantage... It’s a clear NO! But I haven’t seen that king of moves yet! One of my friends when he comes to play has a weird flicking motion. He kind of plays with 2 fingers and just opens up all his fingers at the same time... Which make a weird motion but... Trust me! It does NOT help him at all!!! Lollll I keep trying to help him by showing him a proper motion but he won’t listen...He prefers to keep loosing apparently! 🤷🏼♂️🤣
I say make the push shot legal cause Lord Boot wouldn’t be able to play if it wasn’t:). We’ve all seen him do that thing where he follows the button across the board with his finger haha.
When you examine the pucks in slow motion at 60 fps, it clearly shows that the pucks enter a quantum wave state where they are in all possible positions simultaneously. They are both touching and not touching at the same time until motion stops and wave state collapses into a final position.
At 8:06 where you mention sliding the button under your finger and not letting go until it lands in the 20. Our club has adopted an understanding amongst players that when performing a shot the finger can move but the wrist must stay stationary, thus eliminating the ability to give it some extra 'push'.
Interesting debate about the push shot itself (where the finger and both buttons are touching simultaneously). In snooker, when the cue ball is touching an object ball, any subsequent contact with the cue on the cue ball would be considered an illegal shot, thus the remedy for that is the player must shoot away from where the cue ball and object ball are touching. You can't really shoot away from that situation in crokinole because you'll just end up in the ditch. Not sure how to work around that one. My advice is to keep it simple lol in my experience, new players are often put off if they feel there are too many 'rules' and 'what-ifs'
Recently found this channel and love it. I completely agree with your spirit of the rules. It’s all about enforceability and ease of enforcing the rules.
Welcome and thanks for the nod :-) While I appreciate the agreement please share your thoughts when/if I say something you don't agree with :-)
Thank you Jeremy. Once again, your most recent video has immediately prompted Garth and me into discussion and ... yes, another spontaneous hour of happy flicking. Enjoying reading others comments and feedback.
WooHoo!!! happy to enable such a healthy addiction :-)
Agree with all you say. Keep the rules simple. Nothing worse than a game with too many regulations.
For the very reason that you explained about not having rules to cover these shooting situations, makes in necessary for a game with a governing body to set such rules.
Anyway to get the green discs from your website? Dont see that colour option there.
Everything is fun and games until something is really on the line and at that point the rules need to be clear. I have played 8 ball and 9 ball in the APA (American Poolplayers Association, there is a Canadian version as well) for about 15 years. When you get to league night in regular season some people are easy going, some are sticklers. Playoffs get tense, Tri Cup and LTC, which determines what teams get a paid trip to Vegas, are very tense where you always have a someone waiting for an inadvertent rule violation in addition to the simple fact that with all on the line nobody wants to be out due to a misinterpretation.
The problems described here are very similar to what is seen in billiards.
Push shots in pool mean that your cue is in contact with the cue ball and drives it through its contact with the object ball, pushing both together. That is a no no and it typically happens when they are so close that the cue cannot be drawn back fast enough, usually because the cue ball and object ball are simply too close or even touching. In pool the way to counter this is to shoot "away" at a tangential angle to avoid this or to shoot sharply down and into the table. Shooting down in crokinole is impossible so I would say shoot "away" to prevent the push shot IF PUSH SHOTS ARE TO BE ILLEGAL IN CROKINOLE. Frankly I don't think we should bother with them being illegal in crokinole. The rule can be a real bear to deal with in pool and I say if it isn't already illegal in crokinole already then don't confuse things.
PUSH SHOTS IN CROKINOLE: PUSH SHOTS IN CROKINOLE SHOULD BE LEGAL.
Double hits in pool, where the cue ball comes back and hits the shooter's cue, are a scratch in pool, giving "ball in hand" to the opponent. There is no ball to place in hand for crokinole so I say simply make it a lost disc. In fact I say make this simple and address both the double hit and the "accidental contact." In APA league play if the shooter accidentally contacts any ball other than the cue ball on the table the opponent gets to place it back where they choose. In higher stakes league this can get truly nasty where the opponent has the right to place that contacted ball anywhere to tremendous advantage. In normal play we simply place it back where it was last. For crokinole I say we look at it in a similar way.
ACCIDENTAL CONTACT IN CROKINOLE: IF ANY DISC CONTACTS THE PLAYER AFTER THEY MAKE THEIR SHOT (SHOOTING DISC LEAVES THEIR FINGER) THEN THE OPPONENT GETS TO PLACE IT WHERE THEY CHOOSE ANYWHERE FLAT ON THE BOARD OR IN THE DITCH BUT NOT IN THE 20 HOLE. This can be really punishing but the answer is, get your hand clear!
As far as the nonsensical idea of sliding the disc all the way to the twenty hole simply make a rule stating THE PLAYER'S UPPER ARM MAY NOT MOVE DURING THEIR SHOT. If your fingers are moving your upper arm shouldn't be and if you are sliding the disc they your upper arm is moving and therefore you are not shooting.
Finally there is the last resort used in tournaments when money or positions are on the line, call for a third party observer.
First, I really love that you approached this problem with the scientific method. As someone with a science background, I really appreciate that. Second, I have no problem with the shot you are talking about. I don't understand the controversy involved in this issue. It's a rare occurrence and I've never seen anyone argue over it... but maybe I just haven't been playing long enough or in large enough circles for this to matter. I also love that the rules are designed not to be fought over, I vote to keep things mostly as they are. The one thing I might add is that they might include the definition of a "flick" or what constitutes a flick for the official rules. Third and most importantly, let me just say that I am changing my club name to "The Douchey Russian Bots." Well done sir, well done!
I am so damn proud to know that a random comment from Mac has inspired, not a rule change but a club name change LOL
Hello Jeremy. I have been looking into getting a board, and have started watching a lot of your content. I wonder about pushing a button from the top. Have you recorded the amount of time a finger is in contact with a button when pushed from the top, versus flicking from behind? I would guess the length of time the finger is in contact in both cases, is tied to the reach of the finger. I would guess, it's about the same amount of time in both cases.
Thanks all the variety of video delving into the game!
I have not recorded that. when folks ask me if that is a legal way to shoot my response is that I don't know for sure that it is illegal per se but I do feel that the ceiling of skill is extremely low when you shoot this way. On day one you may have more success but in the long run (not even long run, even after a few games I think) the better way to go is to dial in the flick. try different fingers, thumb vs no thumb etc. check out our video on how to flick your disc where we go through a lot of options
@@TraceyBoardsGreat discussion. I agree that no rule change is needed. Current rules state “A disc must be struck by one or more fingers. No aids, such as finger guards, are permitted.” When I’ve played with people who want to put their finger on top of the disc to “slide” it, this is the rule I refer to. Placing your finger on top of the disc is not a “strike” of the disc. Theoretically you could strike the disc from the top in such a manner, so I would not be opposed to verbiage regarding striking the curved portion of the disk or something to that effect. I also believe that the “struck” language eliminates the debate regarding a push. Strikes can take place with different amounts of force and energy; however, it would seem to me that once that force or energy comes to rest, it ceases to be a strike. In the case of a flicking “strike” in crokinole, the strike begins when the finger makes contact with the disc and ends when the finger is extended. The more I consider this, I wouldn’t mind seeing language regarding a “flick” being added to the rules as it might more clearly allude to what I believe is the spirit of the “struck” terminology as it currently reads. The dictionary definition of a flick being, “the sudden release of a bent finger or thumb, especially to propel a small object.”
I agree. No rule change
Near the start of the video you make a distinction between this shot and a "double hit". What would a double hit be? I can't find any mention of the term online. Is it the same as in pool, except with your finger instead of the cue?
If the shooter disc bounces back from a nearby hit and hits your finger. I say simply treat it like any accidental contact between the shooter’s hand and any disc on the board after making the shot; the opponent gets to decide where the disc which hit the finger goes, anywhere but the 20 hole. Put it in the ditch, put it hidden, whatever. The simply fact is the shooter is responsible for not getting their hand clear. Problem solved.
Everyone is going to hate me for this one. But I refreshed myself with "Newtons Law Applied to Collisions" And every time we flick a buttons thats together or touching we are actually pushing them. When they are apart the only reason why some buttons tend to keep moving after they are hit, is because they are not all the same. Each button does not have the exact same mass and structure and dencity. Which leads up to "Newtons Second Law" which pertains to behaviour of an object for which all existing forces are not balanced. Dam... Physics is everywhere.
You are absolutely correct that if they touch there is a push. In billiards we can end up in such a situation through no fault of our own. In Crokinole you can set it up. Either way declaring push or no push has many times ground games to a vault in my pool league. Better to simply say there is NO RULE against pushing in Crokinole. You can and I can, any advantage is equal and simply move on.
If A starts with velocity v (vector) and A hits B (identical to A) which is stationary, then A stops and B moves with velocity v ONLY if the line connecting their centers is in line with A's original direction of motion. This is a direct result of the laws of conservation of momentum and energy. Ignoring those pesky critters known as friction, sound, heat, and other energy losses such as deformation effects.
However, If A strikes B off-center then both will continue to move. But you know that since it's the base of carom shots.
Be careful when applying physics since simple analysis of collisions typically is based on "assume the chicken is a sphere of zero radius".
I would like to see a rule added. Which will help with the pushing or flicking of a button. "The palm of your hand must not move in making a shot" This will allow someone who is using a pushing motion rather than a flicking motion not to have an unfair advantage. When I play a game, I have never allowed a player to put his finger on top of the button and push it. But I have seen a lot a new players when they flicking a button tend to use a forward motion of their wrist and flicking action together which is more like an extended push combined with a flick. But then again maybe we should not change anything. There are enough rules in the world. Maybe we should use just common sense.
that is very interesting. I like the way you are thinking. I have seen folks flick the button by moving their arm who do it in a short enough burst that they aren't staying in contact with the disc any longer than a traditional flicker but I am still OK with the wording of your rule suggestion. One of the reasons I am OK with it is because I think that this rule will actually help new players avoid that technique which I feel has an extremely low ceiling.
The people I play with say you can't be touching the disk after it leaves the shooting line. It's sometimes hard to tell but at least it's a firm rule.
I was thinking similarly, but would go with wrist instead of palm. It's a bit more flexible on hand positions and shooting styles as well as more natural to setup with your wrist as an anchor, to use an archery term. It's also easier to see as the shooter's palm is face down.
Anchoring from archery is a useful concept that I've applied to Crokinole and as Jeremy pointed out this could be used to help me players get into the game faster. I think there does need to be a rule to this effect, but hopefully we can use it as a positive rather than a barrier to new players, like a rule about double hits or pushing might by being obscure or overly specific.
@@TraceyBoards Yes - I've seen this in new players as well and it leads to extremely inconsistent shots. But, should we build rules around requiring players to play in a way that increases their ceiling based on what is "typically true"? I'm not so sure. I'm willing to be there is SOMEONE out there whose shot is better becuase they are able to move their arm while they shoot. It's not me, and I'm convinced anchoring your hand somehow is the best method, but, people are weird - there's gotta be someone.
As a casual player who plays with people who like to bend the rules, I’ve always just had a policy that you’ll know it when you see it if anyone tries to go too far by making their flick an extended push. This works great but I do feel like a rule for flicking would be helpful so I can cite an actual reason why I won’t allow someone to shoot a certain way.
I have a question:
Can I purposefully miss to mitigate the risk of only hitting my own discs and having them all eliminated?
When I say purposefully miss, I mean literally flicking no where near the discs.
Watch me get hate mail.... Absolutely. That's a strategic tactic. It's just an invalid shot and the disc gets put in the ditch. Also, why flick when you can just "trough" the shot. (directly place your disc in the ditch without shooting). As the rules currently sit, there is no rule against that.
@@roycampbell2467 I've just been playing and three of my discs in the 15 and one of the opponents. Why would I ever try and shoot and risk all of my discs being put in the gutter when I'm currently on top with points.
OK, I'll just gutter it in future without even shooting.
video coming soon :-) Short answer, yes that is 100% legal :-)
I agree - no need for a rule change. This is a helpful video in thinking through a complex situation, but honestly I have to wonder how often this will really come into play, especially in a competitive game. I can't imagine that most players are going to go for a shot where the 2 discs are touching and shoot them both in a virtually identical direction rather than (if it's an opponents disc) move the shooter off to the side and go for a ricochet hide or 20 while getting the off on the opponents disc. Even in the shot that led to this video when it was his own disc, it clearly didn't pan out and the only reason it was taken was because it was, to quote Jeremy, an "inconsequential" shot. Apparently this is a more common issue than I've encountered if it was brought up and has been questioned - but - strategically, wouldn't this be extremely rare? Or - are shots like this common place because you have a shot at a 20 and leaving a disc in the 15?
you have official instigated a follow up video :-). I figured there would be one anyway after enough folks shared their thoughts but now I am thinking we will do a video about why on earth a player would ever want to do this. So thank you!
As with pool, if one ball hits another where the center of both the hit and incoming ball are in line with the direction of travel (and without any appreciable spin), you will have a transfer of kinetic energy between the incoming ball and the ball that gets hit (balls of same size, same mass). Any time you have both disks traveling together in essentially a straight line parallel to the incoming disk, you've pushed both disks. You're essentially shooting two disks at once. That does seem unfair to me. If the two disks don't hit "directly" (i.e., both centers on the line of the direction of travel of the incoming disk), then kinetic energy is split between the two disks, but they will be diverging away from the point of contact.
That's a not-all-that-well explained, semi-technical explanation, but I think the key is whether your finger is ever transferring energy to two different disks simultaneously. I think the rule could simply be "You cannot push two disks." Flicking one disc into another is fine, but you can't push more than one disc. Do that experiment with the vector math and I think you will find that there is this big transfer of energy with fair hits. When they hit "obliquely", there is still a big energy transfer and the total kinetic energy of the system just after the hit does not change. That should sum up very differently than two-disc pushes/flicks. With some good camera work, you can show the vector equations and total energy in the system just after an oblique hit.
Perhaps to make the rule more memorable, you could call it the 'electrocution rule': if your finger ever touches the disk you are shooting and another disc simultaneously, you get "electrocuted". Such things are too hard to try to undo: I think the penalty should be essentially the same as if you fail to hit your opponents disc: yours goes in the gutter, the rest of the board remains. Maybe if they do it twice in the same game, on the second time their one disc goes in the gutter plus another one?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elastic_collision
Some rules clarify - some rules only cause more confusion in how to apply them. I think one trying to address this issue would likely end in the latter category. You would also need a rule to say what happens if there is an "illegal" shot. Lose your turn and set disc in gutter? Shoot again? Were discs hit and the same debate of where were they at the start? It's all so complicated - sigh.
I think you've hit on a good point, it might need to borrow from snooker where the ref needs to replace the buttons. This could pose an issue for non tournament games but it does not stop pub snooker.
Buying my first Tracey board real soon. Can’t wait!!
when you said soon, you meant it. That's awesome
I thought there was a rule that your hand couldn't go outside of your quadrant?
The main rule to do with your hand is that only your shooting hand is allowed to touch the board or table during your shot.
Love the thinking: rules should make the game easy to understand and play with the fewest possible arguments. Simple rules keep crokinole fun. Regarding the flick vs. push example, don't forget about rule 7e: "A disc must be struck by one or more fingers..." To me, the word "struck" means that the contact must be a momentary strike, not an extended push. If this becomes a significant point of discussion, the ruling body might look at a similar example from the rules of volleyball, which requires a contact to be quick and not extended (e.g. a hit, not a catch-and-throw). Regarding the original shot in question, if slow-motion cameras cannot even show whether a double hit occurred, then we certainly don't need a rule that players have to interpret from real-time observation. A standard striking shot should be good enough.
I mentioned in another comment that the way I've seen it ruled is your finger must be off the disk by the time it leaves the shooting line. That way you don't need to worry about a strike vs a push, you have a clear line.
@@2ndpersonplural652 I appreciate the attempt at clarity. On paper that seems like a clear rule, but in practice it would be impossible to police. Just like the examples of the damage rule or spinning disc, it is impossible to clearly argue what happened in the past. "I was behind the line" - "No you weren't". Not sure what the answer is.
@@PhilHenDrums I don't see how this much different than a foot-fault in tennis. Not easily called and when called by the other player, first time is generally a warning.
This is a good clarification - needs to be "struck" which clears up quite a bit in my mind.
There's no rule on how far you can be in contact with the disc? :O - Well obviously this needs to be added. Perhaps that your palm size from the ditch wall? Hmm... I'll get back to this (got my board today).
no question there are some rules that rely on common sense and sportsmanship amongst the competitors. I always say I look forward to seeing this sport reach new levels and also hope it holds onto it wholesome roots. That will be a tough balance but here's hoping we can find it.
Just hoping it doesn't require a rule book that is 3 inches thick and leads to people arguing instead of just enjoying the greatest game on earth :-)
I don't consider that a double hit and I feel like it would be a bit petty to call it one if they are using ONE flicking motion. I don't see how a "double hit" during a shot would even matter, if anything, it would throw your shot off. One single motion is good enough for me even if technically a double hit actually occurs.
That leaves me to a question and a possible rule. Are you allowed to actually put the shooting disc in contact with a dics on the board and that close to the shooting line? If so, perhaps a rule to state that you cannot place a shooting disc in contact with a disc in play.
One for sure rules addition should be that my 20s actually count as 30.
Every game works with a very small number of rules as long as the last rule is understood to be "and don't be a jerk about it" and the player base is cool enough to observe it.
Crokinole should work this way to. Down the path of rules lawyers lies madness.
I have no qualms with the buttons touching. But I do have an opinion about there being no rule inhibiting a player from maintaining finger contact for as long as they want.
You often talk about making use of strategy within the rules. Well good strategy (whether it is booed by others or you get called names or not) would be to push the button into the center as you demonstrated or push the button into the other players button and continue until it is off the board. So yes why not have a rule such as > your body can only be in contact for a maximum of a half second (or whatever is an appropriate time amount)
Well done Sir 🍻🍻and Mac🍻🍻
The double trouble maker himself...... 🤣
@@TraceyBoards to live up to my name , maybe I should gift you a tobacco pipe and some incredible tobacco to enjoy.
@@extrapintcrokinoleclub1470 thatll teach me a lesson 😀
Why not implement a rule that says your finger cannot remain in contact with the button once the button fully passes the shooting line or a set length past the shooting line? It would really only need be applied if people are abusing the game and very obviously pushing the button. It kind of seems to accomplish what is required without being too in the way. What do people think?
The "set length" beyond the shooting line would invite unresolvable argument about that measurement. Similar to "one disc width" separation that can't really be measured without possibly changing the game state. I'm with the group desiring the fewest, simplest, least debatable rules. Part of what makes Crokinole so great is the honorable approach the playing community holds.
while i really like crokinole pool is my favorite game of all time and both a push and a double hit are fouls. In a ball in hand situation you wouldnt be allowed to put the cue ball or in this case a disc down touching another ball/disc it would be a foul which i think makes sense here also your touching a disc thats in play but when a cueball is close to the ball your shooting you have to either elevate your cue which isnt possible here or shoot at an angle as to not double hit or push but it eventually comes down to the judgment of the person asked to watch the hit. To keep the rules simple i think saying atleast a disc away is fair it might not be exact but your opponent could ask you to put a disc between if they think its close and having a double hit would probably be very hard at the distance and be pretty obvious.
Dan Hepburn "trouble maker, problem child, whatever"
Jeremy, you are pretty much like everyone else. You have a right to your own opinion, that is, as long as you agree with me. Therefore, in this instance you have a right to your opinion. Put another way, you got it right. Congratulations!!!!
I'm thinking the game needs 2 official refs with long craps sticks that block and move your buttons around the board. You can never play the game with no less then 2 refs.
I really don’t feel the need for a rule change. Even if the shooter touches the other disc(s), does it make it necessarily an easier shot? 🤔 I don’t think it’s easier than having a shot at an opened 20. In my humble opinion! Because there is another disc involved, there is some variables that are going to affect the way the disc travels! If a player does it against me... I fist bump and say « Good shote mate! » As long as he/she doesn’t move the other disc while trying to set his shooter up! 🤷🏼♂️ I can’t see any problems with that shot, I would let it be! 👌🏼☺️
As for the motion... Common sens that if the player is deliberately moving the disc as to cheat or to gain an unfair advantage... It’s a clear NO! But I haven’t seen that king of moves yet! One of my friends when he comes to play has a weird flicking motion. He kind of plays with 2 fingers and just opens up all his fingers at the same time... Which make a weird motion but... Trust me! It does NOT help him at all!!! Lollll I keep trying to help him by showing him a proper motion but he won’t listen...He prefers to keep loosing apparently! 🤷🏼♂️🤣
ya can't tell a Heinz Pickle nothin' ... oh, maybe that's a down east expression :-)
I say make the push shot legal cause Lord Boot wouldn’t be able to play if it wasn’t:). We’ve all seen him do that thing where he follows the button across the board with his finger haha.
Yes, yes, Lord Boot is my muse that's for sure LOL