Interesting. I guess that means Robert Gagno will have to give up his headphones because there is no way to be sure that he isn’t listening to live commentary? (Just kidding…)
But the reality of situation is that, either headphones are allowed, in which case there is absolutely no way of being sure that a player isn’t listening to a coach who is watching the big screen and giving advice, or headphones aren’t allowed, in which case Robert will possibly play worse than he would with headphones.
I also interpret the current rule as no coaching once the player steps up to the game. The one exception is single player games in which case it’s treated as one long turn.
Also I’m glad that the visual aids rule is there. That NES video was ridiculous. Haha
This has been my understanding. I always thought of the rule as one intended to prevent delay of game, as opposed to one intended to prevent sharing of information, though I could be way off base.
Me too. I don’t care about anyone getting any information during a match as long as they aren’t doing it while it’s their turn to play. Solely for the fact that it would take forever to play a match when everyone is reading their phones, talking strategy during every trapped ball, and pulling papers out.
Not to mention it would be an abysmal experience to watch in person or online.
Bowen felt that a player playing a single-player game is at the machine from the start of the game to the end of the game, therefore no coaching or aids are allowed, even between balls.
Cayle’s view was that the player isn’t actively playing the machine between balls on a single-player game, so coaching and aids are still ok (between balls).
I side with Cayle on this. You are either PLAYING, or you AREN’T PLAYING. In between balls, even on a single player game, IMO you AREN’T playing at that point in time.
“Was the ball in play” would be the question I would ask.
Let’s please not follow this up with, “What if I lock a ball on Scared Stiff, and there’s a new ball in the plunger lane that’s during your current ball in play. Am I still actively playing before I plunge that ball?”
Game was set up for 5 balls . . . instruction card listed the 3 ball rules. I highlighted the rule difference that one could argue cost Keith an IFPA11 win.
It sucked big time. The only thing I could tell Keith when he was like ‘what the fuckkkk’ after competing ONE target bank and noticing his double bonus wasn’t lit was “The game is playing correctly” (not realizing the instruction card was showing the wrong rules).
However, had he won Far Out, he would never have made the magical Paragon slap slaves later on in the match
Pretty much right at 1hr 19minutes. It was ball 2 for Keith.
It definitely cost him 9K on that ball, and he lost by 20K, but you can argue he was definitely irritated the last 3 balls and probably could have found a way to get those additional 11K had he been ‘normal Keith’.
I would have felt much worse if knocking down that 10th target would have actually given him the win.
My experiences over 20 years of losing to Keith is that you hope ‘irritated Keith’ leads to ‘disinterested Keith’ . . . it’s sort of like a solar eclipse. You have that moment as the sun gets blocked to get your win, before things go back to normal
You got lucky my Lefkoff attorney had already left the building lol. Actually I lost interest at 1:23:07 on Congo when a brick shot went into mystery to start Diamond Hunt when I already had lock lit. Then double drain finale after collecting zero diamonds.
