Snookered

Question

I was watching a game of Pool being played to "World Rules" by two teams of eight players.
From time to time, I heard a player call "Total?", whereupon another player would look along the line of sight from the cue ball to the object ball and confirm the claim -or otherwise. ( Apparently, if a player cannot get a direct shot at a legitimate object ball, he is relieved of the requirement to hit a cushion. )
What struck me was the choice of the word "Total". Total what?

Each of the players that I asked replied "Total snooker.", which is nonsensical. Either you are snookered or you are not. Of course, it could be said to refer to the "total" eclipse of the object ball by some unplayable ball, but I think it a pity that they didn't use the delightful word "snooker" (or perhaps "snookered") in its own right.
Interestingly, when I looked up the word "snooker" in the Shorter OED, no etymology was given.

Usenet · Accepted Answer

[nq:1]Interestingly, when I looked up the word "snooker" in the Shorter OED, no etymology was given.[/nq]
There is no need to be snookered or stymied, or whatever. If you are not familiar with the etymology of snooker try the online etymology dictionary
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=snooker&searchmode=none

1889, the game and the word said to have been invented in India by British officers as a diversion from billiards. The name is perhaps an allusion (with reference to the rawness of play by a fellow officer) to British slang snooker "newly joined cadet" (1872). Tradition ascribes the coinage to Col. Sir Neville Chamberlain (not the later prime minister of the same name), at the time subaltern in the Devonshire Regiment in Jubbulpore. The verb meaning "to cheat" is from early 1900s, probably because novices can be easily tricked in the game.
Peter Duncanson
UK (posting from a.e.u)

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Interestingly, when I looked up the word "snooker" in the Shorter OED, no etymology was given.[/nq]
[nq:1]There is no need to be snookered or stymied, or whatever. If you are not familiar with the etymology of ... not so much to win by getting around the course first but to stymie the opposition and make them suffer.[/nq]
Snookering is the art of making the opponent's target unreachable in a line of sight. This can be a partial or a total impasse.

If the player can't hit the ball either directly or by ricochette, he pays a forfeit and has to try again with the ***** reset.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Snookering is the art of making the opponent's target unreachable in a line of sight. This can be a partial ... the ball either directly or by ricochette, he pays a forfeit and has to try again with the ***** reset.[/nq]
And a pretty art it is too; I'm very familiar with it and have practised it many times.
I notice you chose the word "impasse" so that you could attach adjectives like "partial" and "total". But, since the word "snooker" itself means TOTAL impasse / block / whatever, it is entirely adequate in describing the situation. The player I referred to in my original posting could have simply asked the adjudicator "Snooker?".
I guess my fondness for the word got the better of me. I've snookered myself again.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I notice you chose the word "impasse" so that you could attach adjectives like "partial" and "total". But, since the ... asked the adjudicator "Snooker?". I guess my fondness for the word got the better of me. I've snookered myself again.[/nq]
An impasse is an obstacle preventing the use of a direct route. When you come to a blocked pass you either remove it, go around or give up. Few impasses are total and few snookers are total. There is always a work around.
Since the ***** are only an obstacle on one plane, a player might even be able to bounce the white over the barrier. The problem is in doing so without leaving an opening shot for the opponent to clear the table.

A partial snooker means that the player has to be careful about where he is going to make the white end up while he plays a shot that has limited choices about where the target ball ends up.

Where did you hear that the definition of the term is always a total impasse?

Usenet · Answer

Why do you think the player says to the adjudicator "Total"? What he wants is verification that A DIRECT SHOT AT A PERMITTED BALL IS IMPOSSIBLE.
That is precisely one of the definitions of the word "snooker" that I find in the OED.
If you accept that something can be slightly or partially impossible, there is nothing more I can say.
All your explanations about how to escape from the snooker by indirect means ( swerve shot, cushion shot, jump shot, or whatever) are irrelevant. The block/ impasse on direct play is TOTAL. The player is SNOOKERED. Have you ever played the game?

Usenet · Answer

I admit that I should never have raised this in the first place. I spoke as a British snooker player who was watching a game of Pool -an essentially American game.
It was whimsical, not to say ridiculous, to expect the Pool players to use a term from another game, a bit like expecting a baseball player to be given out "bowled".
Sorry about that.
However, I stand by my interpretation of the word "snooker".

Usenet · Answer

I do have the defence that the only two players I asked used the expression "total snooker". Maybe they were just humouring me -er, humoring?

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I do have the defence that the only two players I asked used the expression "total snooker". Maybe they were just humouring me -er, humoring?[/nq]
What seems to be called by the Snooker commentators a "full ball snooker". So they think it's different. Of course the rules of Snooker do not differentiate between different types of snooker as the rules of Pool do.

Ray.
UK.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]What seems to be called by the Snooker commentators a "full ball snooker". So they think it's different. Of course the rules of Snooker do not differentiate between different types of snooker as the rules of Pool do.[/nq]
I have the feeling I'm partially snookered. I impartially submit.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I admit that I should never have raised this in the first place. I spoke as a British snooker player ... baseball player to be given out "bowled". Sorry about that. However, I stand by my interpretation of the word "snooker".[/nq]
The problem with interpretation of the term "snooker" is that it doesn't really matter what the dictionaries say. The only significant interpretation is that of the governing body. And the present governing body, unlike almost every other g.b. in every other sport, will not allow the rules of the game to be published on-line because they insist on making revenue from publishing the paper version in booklet form.
However, what seems to be a more or less accurate version is at http://www.worldsnooker.com/about the rules.htm
You'll see the key rule is
"16. Snookered
The cue-ball is said to be snookered when a direct stroke in a straight line to every ball on is wholly or partially obstructed by a ball or ***** not on. If one or more ***** on can be struck at both extreme edges free of obstruction by any ball not on, the cue-ball is not snookered."

Which is what I remember. The key thing is that the ball "on" needs to blocked on both sides. If you can hit either side, it isn't snookered. If you can hit one side only, it *is* a snooker and that becomes important in application of rule 3.10 when the referee can award a free ball to a player snookered after a foul.
In other situations, it doesn't actually matter whether a player is snookered. If he is snookered by legitimate means (and he's the judge of whether he *is* snookered - we've all tried, and seen even the best professionals try, to steer the cue ball past what seems to be a partial obstruction but turns out to be a full one) then nothing happens unless he fails to hit the object ball.
So while "snooker" in common parlance means "You can't hit it with a straight shot", in applying the term technically and within the rules, it means "Either you cannot hit the object ball with a straight shot OR you can only hit one side of the object ball with a straight shot." Why pool players would insist on using the term is, of course, mysterious.

From what you write, it would seem that this is Pool in the UK played, presumably, to British rules. In which case the whole thing is cleared up by looking at current British rules:
http://www.tutor.uk8ball.net/sections.php?op=viewarticle&artid=1

There is indeed a section on snookers:
"Q. Total Snookers
1. Definition: A player is in a Total Snooker when it is impossible to playany part of any of the player's own Colour by way of a "straight line" shot. Leaving an opponent in a Total Snooker is not a foul.
2. If a player believes that a Total Snooker exists, the player may ask thereferee for a ruling.
3. If the referee rules that a Total Snooker exists, the player'sobligations under the "Legal Shot" rule are relaxed as follows:- The player need only cause the Cue Ball's initial contact to be with a ball "On". The requirement to pot a ball and / or cause a ball to strike a cushion is waived.
R. Foul Snookers
1. Definition: When an opponent plays a foul shot and this results in theincoming player being snookered, the incoming player is deemed to be Foul Snookered.
2. If a player believes that a Foul Snooker exists, the player may ask thereferee for a ruling.
3. If the referee rules that a foul snooker exists, the player initially hasthe following options:-
1. Play the Cue Ball from where it lies. {see (4)(a) below} OR
2. Ask the referee to remove the Cue Ball so as to allow the playerto play from Baulk. {see (4)(b) below }"
So "total snooker" is a term used in Brit Pool and referees are asked to adjudicate.

John Dean
Oxford

Snookered

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions