With video review available – how would you rule?
Without video review – what facts would you gather on site, and how would you decide?
Consistency across player skill/knowledge levels – how do you keep rulings fair when some players instantly recognize a stuck ball MB and call a TD, while others (equally skilled in ability) may not notice? Should lack of situational awareness ever factor into a ruling?
Role of opponents / spectators – To what extent should other players be responsible for flagging the issue? How do you handle situations where their sight line or rules knowledge is limited?
Real world precedents – have you issued (or seen) rulings on similar cases? What penalties, score adjustments, or voids were applied?
Context & concerns driving the question
In our local scene several strong, experienced players routinely miss stuck ball situations and happily keep flipping. If the default ruling is “no penalty because the player didn’t notice,” there is no incentive to learn the correct behaviour (trap up, call TD).
Knowledge gap shouldn’t decide outcomes: we DQ even new players for playing out-of-turn or tilting through, so why not apply an equally clear cut consequence for playing on with a beneficial stuck ball?
Adjustment vs void/replay:
– Score adjustments can feel arbitrary when we cannot pin down exactly how long the advantage lasted.
– No adjustment feels unfair to the other opponents.
– Voiding and replaying the game can sometimes reward the offender (e.g., if they were far behind on Ball 3).
– What default call strikes the best balance when the exact duration of advantage and points scored is uncertain?
Appreciate everyone’s thoughts, especially any concrete examples of rulings you’ve made so I can build a consistent policy going forward. Thank you!
well it’s not the same as out of turn as the Knowledge gap on games rules / logic is not basic like tilt or your trun.
It does not help that IFPA has not updated the dirty pool / not stuck ball list.
Lots of games have relocks / places to hold balls in MB that are part of the game rules Also DQ on game rules Knowledge is bad and can be really BAD if the TD/TO gets it wrong.
Also can’t have someone who worked on the game playing makeing any kind of ruling. To bad you can’t rule on your own group you are playing in.
On some games you may not know that you are in MB play with only 1 ball in play.
Maybe any one should be allowed to call for ball stack and players are NOT ALLOWED to tell people to back off.
Well what happens with an stuck ball that can only be seen with an over head video feed? Also to be fair all games in the round need to be on video?
I think only video judges / TD/TO should be allowed to call for an review not any random viewer I think some pro golf players got fucked over something that was only seen on super slowmo. And they had an take an extra penalty for not marking the penalty on there score card.
Sounds like a case of getting Sterned. Many recent Sterns have at least one multiball where you can temporarily lock a ball for a varying amount of time. Someone used to those held balls might easily assume the older game was doing the same thing. In this case, I’d rule that both players replay the game (not just one, that would give a “knowing the score to beat” advantage to the score-dq’ed player, plus the other player might have played differently due to the offending player’s score).
This brings another thought to mind: what happens if a legitimately held-in-the-lock ball fails to be released “on time”? Say you’re on Metallica and the ball stays locked for a minute or two longer than it’s supposed to? Who would know? What if the ball is knocked back into the lock as it’s about to come out by one of the other balls still in play and remains in there? How would / could at TD handle either?
I think that the dirty pool rules / not stuck ball rules need to be simplified or the IFPA needs to put in the work of keeping the list up to date (that means listing rom / software versions / mods as well)
Also even games like AFM have an max dirty pool setting.
Other games have settings that control timing / virtual locking
@pinwizj The legitimately held-in-the-lock ball part just makes basing on if it has an something in the game code need an even deeper knowledge dump.
Now maybe some way to be simplified.
For games with up / down banks is can you hit something (be an target / scoop / bumper / etc) with an ball resting on it with the force of an ball hitting it from the other side
1A. captive ball posts / forks allow more then 1 ball to be held in them.
Games with relocks (not post locks) / magnet holds / etc After about 1-2 min (maybe more if on screen timer says so) of one ball play must trap up and then wait up to 60 sec trapped to time out any held lock timers.
drop targets that block shots and are game controlled (game can put down at will) allowed like rule 2.
I really don’t like the idea of both players replaying. If I were Player 1 having a great game, and then had to replay because Player 2 exploited a multiball, I’d be very unhappy. This would be even worse if it affected three other players!
That said, I’m not sure what the best ruling is and have struggled with this myself. I’m inclined to say that if it is possible to figure out an approximate number of points affected (e.g. subtracting the value of a super jackpot) I’d probably try to go with that. I recognize the severe limitations of that, however.
So I think if the TD was called over and there was a determination that during the stuck ball period the player had a significant advantage from the continued play, you can have that player replay that game or if you can reasonably estimate the amount of points awarded during the stuck ball, you can deduct those from their score.
I believe it is also the responsibility of the group and player to notice a stuck ball and trap up immediately. If the group notices it, they should get a TD asap to come and rule on it.
Or if it’s easier, you can just use the FSPA rule that no stuck balls in MB matter. Play on always. Just make sure that is communicated that the beginning of the event.
The FSPA rule, which is basically “play it as it lies”, is much easier and more consistent for everyone involved. It’s not inherently advantageous: the player still has to make skillful shots to earn points. If advanced progress (say, a Super Jackpot) requires action from multiple balls (e.g. a lock-to-qualify-super sort of feature), that may be harder or impossible if a ball is stuck, so the situation might actually be disadvantageous for the player.
It’s also a more consistent ruling with the fundamental “ball is wild” ethos of pinball. TDs seem to love arbitrarily labeling pinball physics as “good” or “bad”. You got a lazarus? Sweet, enjoy your free ball save! You got a bounce into a plunger lane? Oh, no, we can’t allow that! Errrr… what?
Where are you guys getting that information about FSPA rules? The FSPA rules do not say you are allowed to play with a stuck ball. All it says is…
"The following are not automatically considered to be “exceptionally unfair advantages”:
A one ball “multiball” or stuck ball during multiball…"
And it makes no mentions of stuck balls in general in their rules either.
This is essentially the same as the IFPA rules.
“Any beneficial malfunction which provides one or more players with a significant scoring or strategic advantage in a way that is not part of normal gameplay will void the score of the affected player(s), unless all immediately-affected players and Tournament Officials can agree on a suitable adjustment of the score or other elimination of the advantage.”
A “significant scoring advantage” or “exceptionally unfair advantage” are determined by a TD and subjective. Both sets of rules allow for the TD to say it wasn’t significant enough to make a score adjustment or void/replay. The only difference between the rules is the FSPA doesn’t allow for a score adjustment.
You missed the point: “NOT automatically considered to be an unfair advantage.” I don’t remember if this rule was already there in FSPA when I joined in the mid-90’s but I agree with it for many of the reasons Joe stated. While I enforce the IFPA version when required, the FSPA version is better. The TD still CAN determine that it’s an unfair advantage and apply the IFPA remedies, but that ruling is not automatic. It’s pinball, things happen, like lazaruses.
This may be a controversial opinion, but it seems like the IFPA version of the rule incentivizes the player to feign ignorance. That’s a very, very bad property for a rule to have. It makes exploitation trivial and denial unfalsifiable.
Furthermore, it incentivizes competitors to hover over the player’s shoulder, which is usually considered bad etiquette.
On top of that, the TD’s possible actions are also all bad. Deducting points is basically guesswork. Replaying the game delays the tournament, and is potentially super unfair to the other players, who might have been blowing the game up when the infraction occurred – which highlights another problem: The IFPA rule incentivizes a losing player to actively seek this state, if it means they get to replay the game (that scenario might be pretty far fetched though).
The FSPA version (“play it as it lies”) can very occasionally lead to situations that some would deem unfair, but on the plus side, it’s easy to understand and enforce, doesn’t ask opposing players to engage in annoying behavior, and doesn’t ask the player to tell on himself. It also generally doesn’t require any TD intervention (which in this case are time-wasting half-measures, anyway).
Unless I missed it, you actually didn’t ask about IFPA rules in your original question. I only watched a couple minutes of the video you linked, during which I didn’t catch any commentator discussion of the ruleset being used at this event. Your questions and discussion points were all deep into subtleties of event rules. For sure, “stock PAPA/IFPA rules” is a common choice, but so too is “PAPA/IFPA rules with changes X, Y, and Z”. Gotta know what rules were in force at the specific event to know what the ruling coulda/woulda/shoulda been.
Exactly because of the myriad questions and concerns you raised in your original post, I’d suggest giving serious consideration to using the FSPA’s version of this rule when building your own policy going forward. Many events have gone this direction and seem to be happy with it.
Now the other part of stuck balls is the dirty pool / not stuck ball cases.
With an goal of makeing it much easier and more consistent for everyone involved. I would call this stuck
Diverter maybe stuck but in some cases (at least on the shadow) can be allowed in MB.
Now balls in locks
Balls behind (controlled down) drops
Balls behind forks
Balls held on magnets
Balls behind visors
Balls behind up posts
allow by default and if need to change by local POSTED on game rule to change it.
More then one ball relocked / held allowed (unless balls in play drops to zero)
The posted on game part does help with the knowledge part of when something should not be in that place.
That hasn’t been my experience. In league, inexperienced players often don’t notice they have a stuck ball. So they don’t take advantage of it and often don’t win the game. No harm to the integrity of the game.
Experienced players just about always know when a ball is stuck. They know that on Stern Star Trek, a ball often gets stuck in the pops. Can’t see it, but you know it’s there. That’s why a stuck ball rule is needed IMO. Experienced players take advantage of them, new players don’t.
I am a fan of letting a player take a couple whacks at freeing the stuck ball before cradling up and calling a TD over, which is what I do whether anyone is watching or not.
You are correct. I didn’t say what rules were being followed. We generally follow IFPA rules but in this particular event there are no official rules published, so I guess that leaves it up to any ruling is possible.
I still don’t know why you keep saying the FSPA rule is basically “play it as it lies” because as written the rule gives the option to treat a stuck ball in multiball as an unfair advantage. Maybe in practice TDs that follow FSPA rules always rule play it as it lies?
there should be an some middle ground as well. And NO BS like
Well it’s ok to relock / temp lock one ball in Foo Fighters Overlord but re locking 2 may not be ok? at least one TD said that is not allowed?
The dirty pool rule at the very least should talk about the game that do relock balls / hold them in MB.
Also dirty pool rule can use more updates / maybe be an little less about if there is an rule in the game code but more about how like it is to come free (maybe from other ball action being an factor).
FSPA rule 3.4 “Positive Malfunctions” says that a “one ball multiball” or stuck ball during multiball is not an “exceptionally unfair advantage”, meaning that it does not require SLO (TD) involvement described in that rule.
FSPA rule 1.2 “Discretion of League Officials” – similar to PAPA/IFPA rules I.1 “The Nature of Pinball” and I.11 “Rulings” – says that all of the rules are guidelines but can be overridden by the TD as needed. So sure, the TD has an option to treat a stuck ball in multiball as an unfair advantage, but that would be an exceptional ruling. The player at the machine has no obligation to trap up or summon a TD or do anything besides play on, unless/until specifically requested by a TD. That’s what I loosely call “play it as it lies”.
