I'm playing petanque for almost 10 years now.
finally I become a very good shooter in the club.
As I am a flemish speaking player I will try to explain my problem in English :
My balls are getting to smooth and I'm loosing the grip when I'm shooting.
Is there a chemical sollution to remove the smoothness on the balls ?

Nobody need tell me the obvious! I fill in too many forms which read: Forename - Surname - Title (Mr,Mrs or Miss). I would have thought that a better name for this box would be SUBJECT , and judging by the number of MR s in your forum page so would a lot of other people: - but passons! Still, any help on the French team for the WCs, or on how to access the FIPJP/FFPJP sites through Compuserve or any other means would be welcome.

Can anyone shed light on this one that has been bugging me for a while.

Having moved from Scotland to England recently, I have noticed a difference in the way that an umpire measures boule.

Whilst playing in Scotland, invariably, an Umpire, before commencing the measure, would elect the boule that he considers to be closest by the naked eye. He would then proceed to measure. I can only assume that this electing has something to do with resolving a potential dispute due to accidental movement of boule or coche whilst measuring?

This does not happen in England (to my knowledge - I've never seen it anyway). Is this a difference in Rules (different associations)? Why elect a boule in such a manner. Surely accidental movement of boule or coche would be covered by the marking rule i.e. if not marked, the new position of boule or coche stands?

Anyone know the answer?

Jef van den Berg wrote:
------------------------------------

I'm playing petanque for almost 10 years now.
finally I become a very good shooter in the club.
As I am a flemish speaking player I will try to explain my problem in English :
My balls are getting to smooth and I'm loosing the grip when I'm shooting.
Is there a chemical sollution to remove the smoothness on the balls ?

I think your only solution is to get another set of boules. I think that using a chemical solution to alter the grip might be tampering which is not allowed by international rules. Is there a rules expert who can confirm this or not? Sorry if this seems a negative response to your question.

Just out of interest, how old are your boules and what type are they?

Tampering with boules usually refers to either re-heating them to alter the hardness - strictly forbidden with harsh penalties.

If they're carbon steel, you could try leaving them in damp conditions for a few days such that surface rust develops. Some argue that this improves the grip.

You could rough them up with sand-paper - I'm pretty sure this is allowed. Remember: the manufacturer's name, model and letters must always be visible on the boules and they must be within 15g of their stated weight to remain valid competition boules.

I must say that while the grip of different boules does vary - generally top-of-the-range boules have a better grip than bottom-of-the-range boules - I've never seen a boule that I would describe as really slippery .

HI Charles

I have changed the Title -field to Sbbject, to avoid the mistakes that some people have made.

Cheers,
Stig bordsenius
petanque.org


Charles Clarke wrote:
------------------------------------

Nobody need tell me the obvious! I fill in too many forms which read: Forename - Surname - Title (Mr,Mrs or Miss). I would have thought that a better name for this box would be SUBJECT , and judging by the number of MR s in your forum page so would a lot of other people: - but passons! Still, any help on the French team for the WCs, or on how to access the FIPJP/FFPJP sites through Compuserve or any other means would be welcome.

You already gave the answer yourself and you will finf it also in article 28 of the International Rules:

If, during a measure, the umpire disturbs or moves the cochonnet or one of the boules and if, after re-measuring, the point is held by the boule which orginally had judged to be on, in all fairness, he or she may declare it so. Even if the point is no longer held by that boule, the umpire may, in all fairness, still declare that it wins the point.

Jac

Colin Stewart wrote:
------------------------------------

Can anyone shed light on this one that has been bugging me for a while.

Having moved from Scotland to England recently, I have noticed a difference in the way that an umpire measures boule.

Whilst playing in Scotland, invariably, an Umpire, before commencing the measure, would elect the boule that he considers to be closest by the naked eye. He would then proceed to measure. I can only assume that this electing has something to do with resolving a potential dispute due to accidental movement of boule or coche whilst measuring?

This does not happen in England (to my knowledge - I've never seen it anyway). Is this a difference in Rules (different associations)? Why elect a boule in such a manner. Surely accidental movement of boule or coche would be covered by the marking rule i.e. if not marked, the new position of boule or coche stands?

Anyone know the answer?

A while back, I went on an Umpires course. If my memory serves me correctly, one of the things we were taught was, when measuring, first measure the boule that you thought was the *furthest* from the coche.

The reasoning being that if you did accidentally move it whilst measuring, you would a) give the result to the other boule, i.e. the one you thought was closest anyway and b) you would be moving the boule further away.

As an aside, it never ceases to amaze me, that, when one boule has to be measured against 2 other boules, instead of first measuring the reference boule and then comparing against the other 2, players start with one of the other boules and end up making 3 or 4 attempts at measuring all different combinations. Must be the heat :-)

the practice of nominating which boule the umpire thinks is holding was carried out soem years ago due to a misunderstanding of article 28. There is no need for the umpire to nominate a boule.

Colin Stewart wrote:
------------------------------------

Can anyone shed light on this one that has been bugging me for a while.

Having moved from Scotland to England recently, I have noticed a difference in the way that an umpire measures boule.

Whilst playing in Scotland, invariably, an Umpire, before commencing the measure, would elect the boule that he considers to be closest by the naked eye. He would then proceed to measure. I can only assume that this electing has something to do with resolving a potential dispute due to accidental movement of boule or coche whilst measuring?

This does not happen in England (to my knowledge - I've never seen it anyway). Is this a difference in Rules (different associations)? Why elect a boule in such a manner. Surely accidental movement of boule or coche would be covered by the marking rule i.e. if not marked, the new position of boule or coche stands?

Anyone know the answer?

Hello, collin,
There is nothing in the rules about the first ball to be measured simply because technically each ball must be marked, so there is no danger for accidently moving a ball.

Hope I've helped,
Rony

david blakeley wrote:
------------------------------------



Jef van den Berg wrote:
------------------------------------

I'm playing petanque for almost 10 years now.
finally I become a very good shooter in the club.
As I am a flemish speaking player I will try to explain my problem in English :
My balls are getting to smooth and I'm loosing the grip when I'm shooting.
Is there a chemical sollution to remove the smoothness on the balls ?

I think your only solution is to get another set of boules. I think that using a chemical solution to alter the grip might be tampering which is not allowed by international rules. Is there a rules expert who can confirm this or not? Sorry if this seems a negative response to your question.

Ofcourse , new balls are the best sollution, but I know other sollutions are possible.

Hi Mike,
Your verdict on Article 28 surprises me a little, not because I just disagree but because it seems to confuse me when I read the article. The article seems to say quite clearly that if the Umpire moves boule or coche he may in all fairness declare the original boule he judged to be on to have won the point.
Does this not mean he makes a choice before measuring?
Vernon.


Mike Pegg - International Umpire wrote:
------------------------------------

the practice of nominating which boule the umpire thinks is holding was carried out soem years ago due to a misunderstanding of article 28. There is no need for the umpire to nominate a boule.

Colin Stewart wrote:
------------------------------------

Can anyone shed light on this one that has been bugging me for a while.

Having moved from Scotland to England recently, I have noticed a difference in the way that an umpire measures boule.

Whilst playing in Scotland, invariably, an Umpire, before commencing the measure, would elect the boule that he considers to be closest by the naked eye. He would then proceed to measure. I can only assume that this electing has something to do with resolving a potential dispute due to accidental movement of boule or coche whilst measuring?

This does not happen in England (to my knowledge - I've never seen it anyway). Is this a difference in Rules (different associations)? Why elect a boule in such a manner. Surely accidental movement of boule or coche would be covered by the marking rule i.e. if not marked, the new position of boule or coche stands?

Anyone know the answer?

Rony Herut wrote:
------------------------------------
There is nothing in the rules about the first ball to be measured simply because technically each ball must be marked, so there is no danger for accidently moving a ball.

Rony,
Art 28 makes no mention of (exception for) a cochonnet or a boule marked.
A mark is only an approximative location! Moving a marked cochonet or boule therefore results in losing the point.

28 If, whilst measuring, one of the players moves the cochonnet or a boule being measured, his or her team loses the point.

Guy

Vernon Walker wrote:
------------------------------------

Hi Mike,
Your verdict on Article 28 surprises me a little, not because I just disagree but because it seems to confuse me when I read the article. The article seems to say quite clearly that if the Umpire moves boule or coche he may in all fairness declare the original boule he judged to be on to have won the point.
Does this not mean he makes a choice before measuring?
Vernon.

Vernon,
When I read Mike's response, I took it he meant that the umpire does not «nominate or tell» which side has the point, but he still «judges» which boule has the point and keeps that info to himself.

Imagine the following scenario; The umpire «nominates» a boule has having the point. He then measures and now tells that the «other boule» has the point!!!

What would you think of his initial judgment? Worse, what would you think if the next time he does not nominate a boule but moves one and declares one boule has having the point because he had judged it closest before measuring?

It is better if he keeps his before-measuring-judgement to himself, IMHO.

Guy

Mike Pegg - International Umpire wrote:
------------------------------------

the practice of nominating which boule the umpire thinks is holding was carried out soem years ago due to a misunderstanding of article 28. There is no need for the umpire to nominate a boule.

Colin Stewart wrote:
------------------------------------

Can anyone shed light on this one that has been bugging me for a while.

Having moved from Scotland to England recently, I have noticed a difference in the way that an umpire measures boule.

Whilst playing in Scotland, invariably, an Umpire, before commencing the measure, would elect the boule that he considers to be closest by the naked eye. He would then proceed to measure. I can only assume that this electing has something to do with resolving a potential dispute due to accidental movement of boule or coche whilst measuring?

This does not happen in England (to my knowledge - I've never seen it anyway). Is this a difference in Rules (different associations)? Why elect a boule in such a manner. Surely accidental movement of boule or coche would be covered by the marking rule i.e. if not marked, the new position of boule or coche stands?

Anyone know the answer?