Tilt through (kind of) ruling

That’s interesting, because I’ve always just thought of it as not being a tilt through.

2 Likes

I’d have to agree with Colin here; unless the affected player actually lost a ball due to the previous player’s tilt, then I can’t see that as a tilt-through. The gray interpretation area of when a turn stops and starts seems irrelevant to me in this case since nothing is lost (well, except the tilter’s bonus).

1 Like

However, at the same time, I am not allowed to tilt a stern before qualifying the playfield, say on F2K if the ball is going to the wrong lane on plunge. That is ruled tilt to gain advantage.

Good point. I think, then, that the key word or concept is “advantage.”

Illegal intentional tilt: provides advantage to the offending player (getting to re-plunge, getting benefit from tilt due to releasing locked balls, etc). The gray area in dealing with the assessing whether the tilt was intentional is discussed in other threads.

Tilt Through: provides disadvantage to the offended player (loss of ball or game). On a Stern Electronics game, the offended player receives no disadvantage because they don’t lose the ability to play their next ball.

3 Likes

Keep in mind that the classic Stern tilt-thru protection was implemented because of how easy it is to tilt thru on them. If no bonus has been collected and the ball screams through the flippers as a hard save is attempted, it’s very likely the computer will put the next player up while the bob is still banging around, so they worked around that. OTOH most modern games have at least some FWB routine regardless of how bad the ball was (not TWD though), and also have tilt warnings and debounce code that make tilt thrus much less likely. I think it is correct to not DQ classic Stern tilt thrus.

2 Likes