Category: SWAN

(This article was published in the Croquet Gazette dated 27^th. February, 1908. It seems that bad luck has always accompanied the losing player. Present day croquet players will no doubt sympathise with much else in this article. – Allen Parker)

 

         The term ‘luck’, which is so often used to summarise the varying degrees of good and bad fortune incident in the game of croquet, is open to a large number of definitions, but in whatever sense it is used, we come ultimately to the bedrock idea of something wholly beyond human control and therefore super-human.

 

         From this point it is a very short step to the idea of luck being the special attribute of an imaginary deity, and in so far as we are vastly more impressed by bad luck than the reverse, it is more usual to associate this despotic control with the personality of a devil than a benevolent deity. Hence such expressions as ‘the devils own luck’.

 

         Some of the multitude of meanings of luck as applied to croquet may repay with interest a little reflection, and since good luck to one side is the reverse to the other, we may use the single word to express a double meaning without misunderstanding.

        

         Even before the game commences luck obtrudes itself in the draw. One player has a succession of easy tasks while another runs up against formidable opponents in round after round.  A’s path is a path of roses, B’s one of thorns, ere they meet in the final.

 

         Luck may or may not be dependent on the play itself. It is luck pure and simple to make a roquet by glancing off a wire if such an eventuality did not enter the player’s mind beforehand, but it is luck of a different kind to bring off a long roquet at the most desirable moment, and again, it is a different kind of luck to find a strong opponent ‘off’ his game. The ‘luck of the toss’, of which we hear so much in cricket, hardly exists in croquet, thanks to the equal chances offered to both sides by the method of commencing the game.

 

         Bad luck must be carefully distinguished from bad play. One may hear a twelve-bisquer exclaim his luck in getting wired from the ball he has taken off to, but this sort of luck rarely occurs to a good player who keeps in mind the possibility of little accidents of the kind, and avoids them by proper care. Or again, a thoughtless player, after running a hoop, roquets a ball beyond; he then finds that a hoop obstructs the course of one of the balls in taking croquet. This is not bad luck but lack of forethought.

 

         Nowhere is the luck of the game more in evidence than in long shots. Time after time when we are down on our luck (we are generally playing badly, by the way, on these occasions) we miss by a hairbreadth, while our opponent seems to hit by the same margin. But the crowning point of all is that long shot when we are laid up to go out!     How is it that our opponent always comes in on that particular shot? It is hard to escape the conclusion that the extra care and attention bestowed at these critical moments does materially help us to shoot straight.

         Perhaps both sides have something to do with the result. May not our own anxiety lest he should hit act in some telepathic manner as a stimulus to the opponent?     Certainly there are times when we feel ‘in our bones’ that the opponent is certain to hit, and he does; less commonly we leave a far from difficult shot with the utmost confidence in a miss, and we are justified by the result. Everyone must admit this subtle influence of one player on another, an influence we can realise without being able to explain.

 

         A curious and interesting fact to be observed is the striking force with which we note our opponent’s good luck and our own bad luck, while we remain remarkably inobservant of the reverse conditions. It is to be observed that the explanation of the mystery is very simple, and may be summed up in the single word ‘selfishness’. It is so easy to persuade ourselves that our own good luck is the just reward of our play, or at least a trifle on account against the heavy debt of bad luck owing to us.

 

         Luck, be it good or bad, is fairly consistent in two respects only. In the first place luck generally follows the winner. This does not mean that the winner succeeds because he has better luck, but rather expresses the rule that the worse you play the more bad luck you will be certain to get. In the second place luck, good or bad, will follow you consistently for a time. Luck comes in ‘runs’. One week you may successfully stake your chances time after time in a manner that violates some principle of tactics. You go a rocky ‘no-trumper’ and romp home. The very next week perhaps you break the same rule just once and pay the just penalty. When your luck is ‘in’, back it for all it is worth. There is a tide in the affairs of croquet players. When your luck is ‘out’ you will be wise to take a week off.

 

       At present there is no such blind worship of the goddess of chance by croquet devotees as is often seen in some other games. At bridge (if we may credit ladies’ newspapers) many are the charms and sacrifices offered to invoke the smiles of the fickle goddess. The golfer playing at the top of his game one day has been known to take infinite pains to dress in a similar manner to the minutest detail on the next, lest the tiniest deviation in his attire should invoke the wrath of the malignant fate.

 

       Can we imagine a lady croquet player a similar slave to base superstition? Even the belief that red and yellow will be luckier than blue and black is very rare in modern days, though perhaps some of us are inclined to be a trifle superstitious now and again in choosing the colours with which we have just been successful in the last game; but even in this case we like to adduce the more logical reason of a desire to avoid the possible confusion of a change in colours.

 

       It has not yet been suggested that by turning the mallet round three times our luck will change in response. Our particular goddess of luck does not demand a worship of ritual, nor will she be coerced by curses, but rather should she be wooed as the handmaid of success.

                                                                                                                             MEDICUS

Greek meets Greek

An account of a game played in 1904

Submitted by Allen Parker

 

[This was the old sequence game with the balls played in the order Blue, Red, Black, Yellow. Until 1905 the start of the game was from one foot in front of the first hoop. The ‘A’ baulk was not introduced until 1907. The arrangement of the hoops and pegs was the Hale setting (see diagram).There were two pegs, the winning peg, and a ‘turning peg’.   The order of the hoops was the same as now but after running hoop 6, one had to hit the turning peg before proceeding to one-back. There were no lifts and one could wire an opponent’s ball without penalty. There was the ‘dead’ ball, i.e. the opponent’s ball that had just played. One could lay up with the dead ball and put one’s partner ball to one’s next hoop. Thus, unlike the present either ball game, one’s opponent had only one ball to play with and thus a limited choice of shot, which, if missed, resulted in an almost certain all-round break by the expert opponent, ending with the opponent’s ‘live’ ball wired from everything. Many games between experts ended with the result 28-0, with the loser never taking croquet. As an average player I used to find the sequence game very interesting, particularly in doubles, where of course the partners had to play alternately. In the account below the ‘forward stroke’ was what we now call the ‘side-style’. The golf style of the second player was the most common style in the nineteenth century. It is hardly ever used today except by some players for roll strokes.]

 

Brilliant sunshine tempered by a slight breeze, a fast and true lawn, surrounded by an unbroken ring of spectators, evidently waiting for some more exciting match than that which is being dragged to a close by two performers rendered more nervous than usual by the unusual ‘gallery’ that criticises their play. Ah! That’s over at last! and the rattle of the stricken peg sends a thrill of expectation through the waiting crowd. From opposite corners, stepping lightly over the netting the two ladies for whom we are waiting. Both tall and fair, graced with the slimness of youth but markedly differing in face and style – alike however in the keen look which gathers quickly every detail of environment, and in the subdued promptness of preparation which marks the expert. One, who has won the toss, takes the lead with Blue and Black, in a feathery hat and trailing dress deftly gathered to leave the right side free for the sweep of the mallet, the other in blouse, short business-like skirt, and shady straw hat.

Blue plays with the forward stroke off the right foot, aiming with a characteristic airy poise, and hitting with a fine upward sweep. The ball runs well past No.2 and by the next stroke into 3 corner. Red follows with the golf stroke, played with startling rapidity, one glance at the object seeming to suffice. Gently through the hoop and a tice close to the peg is her response to Blue’s opening. Black takes up the gage and hitting red, rolls both to No.3 and lays the break for Blue. Yellow shoots but in vain. A roquet, an easily laid rush, and Blue is away with a break. Each ball in turn rolls, apparently by instinct, into the right position; running of hoops is child’s play, so perfect are the short approaches; Yellow is picked up from the boundary, and lies in the centre. Red is crossed to 2-back at the appointed time; cause and result seem automatic – but there is a check! The machinery stops; and Blue lies up against No.5 hoop. Something has gone wrong. An error of a few inches in direction, helped by the mysterious affinity between the ground and the natural perversity of the ball, and the turn is over. All Blue can do is play away from red, which lies dangerously near. Only 15 yards! Of course Red will hit. Before the majority have grasped the position, the lithe figure has straightened as the mallet swings and Red – misses.

Black will not make such a mistake, say the wiseacres, as she proceeds to roquet, split and rush the balls for the easy break left; and, as before, the automatic game goes on with a leisurely swing, and point follows point with a certainty that bodes ill for Yellow.   But there is always, or nearly always a but – Black repeats Blue’s error and comes to rest close indeed to Blue, but with the wire of 1-Back between them, and no ball open. There is nothing for it but to trust Yellow again. This time the slashing golf stroke is truly struck, and Yellow roquets Red in the centre at 14 yards.  

As has been aptly quoted of her, ‘When she is good she is very very good’, and with the perfect nerve and brilliant rapid execution, Yellow dashes off the 4-ball break to the first Rover hoop and lays the break for Red, Blue safely wired in 4-back. Blue can but corner, and Red repeats the break, making no semblance of a mistake until 4-back; there, with Black close by, she is short in her approach and leaves a difficult hoop – 3 yards and barely open! But she is well set in her game, and decides to take the risk – the ball takes the wire at the angle and spins through. A round of applause greets the plucky player, who finishes the break by making all Red’s points except the peg, placing Black near No.3 corner, and leaving Yellow with Blue and Red close by, all three protected from Black by intervening wires. Black lets drive rather on the principle of the slayer of Ahab, at a venture, but without analogous success, for the ball glances from a wire and runs harmlessly off the boundary. Yellow makes the last two hoops, gets a rush on Red and pegs out, winner of a brilliant game, to the enthusiastic delight of the large gallery, who have followed every stroke with keen appreciation and hail the victory of what was undoubtedly the best play.

Very marked is the difference between the two styles. The machine-like perfection of one is such as to evoke surprise when anything goes wrong; the rapid brilliancy of the other leaves the impression of a succession of tours-de-force with danger always near. Yet the machinery is, when necessary, capable of studied brilliancy, the less remarkable because of ease of execution; while the constant brilliancy resolves itself on analysis into real accuracy of stroke, disguised, or maybe embellished, by extraordinary rapidity. When next they meet, may I be there to see, and let not the issue be confined to a single game. 

                                                                                                                                                                                    J.A.M

Differences in the Croquet Rules in 1900

The following are the most important differences from the modern game

 

The setting of the hoops and pegs shall be in accordance with the diagram.    Measurements: Pegs in centre line of ground, 7 yards from nearest boundary; hoops up centre line of ground, 7 yards from peg and 7 yards apart; corner hoops 7 yards from boundary and in line with peg. The first peg shall be called the turning peg and the second the winning peg.

 

The players, if not more than two, shall play alternately, and if more than two, alternately according to side, keeping the same order and balls throughout the game. The balls shall be played in the following order:- Blue, Red, Black, Yellow. Or Red, Black, Yellow, Blue, etc. according to whichever ball begins. If a player plays the first stroke of the game with the wrong ball of the unplayed balls, the balls shall be changed without penalty.

 

In commencing, each ball in turn shall be placed on the starting point, one foot from the playing side of the first hoop and opposite its centre.  When the striker’s ball has been so placed and a stroke taken, the ball is in play, and can roquet or be roqueted by any other ball in play, whether either ball has run the first hoop or not. If the striker’s ball was not so placed when the stroke was taken, the adversary may, before the second stroke is played, require the ball to be duly placed and the stroke replayed. If the starting point be occupied by another ball, the striker’s ball shall be placed in contact with the other ball, and a roquet deemed to be made.

 

There were no baulks and no lifts.

 

A player could wire an opponent’s ball from all the other balls without penalty.

How Good a Referee Are You?  (Answers Below)

 

Taken with the author’s permission from ‘The Lighter Side of Serious Croquet’ by David Appleton ISBN 0 9520246 16 (1996)

 

1. Dan has a lift. He places his ball in corner 2 and makes a roquet on his partner ball about four yards away. His opponent points out that he has not played from baulk, and you are called on to determine how play should continue. What is your decision?
2. You have been called on to attend the peg as Steve attempts to peg out his opponent from some distance. The opponent’s ball misses the peg and goes off the lawn; the striker’s ball hits the peg, but you are not sure whether this occurred before or after the other ball left the lawn. Should the striker’s ball be removed from the lawn?
3. Ray roquets black with red and takes croquet from it, sending black off the lawn. Red ends up within the yard line area with a rush on blue. After replacing black on the yard line Ray indicates that he will take a bisque. May he play red from where it lies?
4. In an advanced doubles game Bill and Ben, playing blue and black respectively, are entitled to a lift under law 36(a). After much discussion with his partner, Bill picks up black and plays it from the end of A baulk. He misses, and replaces the ball on the yard line beside red. His opponents then realise that Ben should have been playing black. Do the balls stay as they lie? Should Ben play the lift shot? Should Bill take the lift with blue? Or what?
5. Syd misses a roquet in a corner. He takes a bisque and plays with the ball which was already in the corner. He makes two hoops with it, using two more bisques, before the error is discovered. What happens?
6. Charlie clangs a hoop and takes a bisque. He effects a roquet, gets poor position with the croquet stroke and gives the situation earnest thought. At long last he attempts the hoop and fails again. He looks at the balls from all angles and eventually hits his ball into a corner. His opponent says “You have taken a bisque, you know.” Is this correct? If you have been observing the vignette can you do anything?
7. At the end of a turn in which he took a half bisque, Vic ends up in the jaws of his hoop, having trickled there in taking position. Can he take a bisque and complete the running of the hoop? Can he run the hoop in a subsequent turn if he finds it still there?
8. A referee is called to a distant court by Chris, who claims that Alex has committed a fault (a double tap) approaching a hoop. Alex disagrees. What are the powers of the referee?
9. Dennis accidentally peels his partner ball (red) through hoop 1, but fails to notice and does not remove the clip. Senga sees it happen but thinks she is not allowed to interrupt Dennis to draw it to his attention because no fault has been committed. When, some time later, Dennis runs hoop 1 with red, Senga apologetically tells him he is not entitled to a continuation shot because red is actually on hoop 2. Dennis is a bit peeved. What should the outcome be?
10. Jim sticks in 4-back, puts his clip on the hoop, and saunters back to his seat at the far end of the lawn. Before he has left the lawn his opponent, Bella, comes on from the north boundary and says “your ball is through 4-back, Jim”. What should the referee rule when he is called on the court, assuming he confirms Bella’s judgement?

 

 

How Good a Referee Were You?             

 

1. David Appleton’s original answers, written before the new law book came into force, have been updated by Ray Ransom to take account of the changes.

 

1. The error is rectified and the striker restarts his turn by playing the same ball from baulk

(Law 27g(1)). If the error was not discovered before the third stroke of the striker's turn, then the roquet stands.

2. It is irrelevant whether the ball hits the peg before or after the other one left the lawn. Law 5i defines the end of a stroke as the moment when all balls moved have come to rest or have left the court; the peg point may therefore be scored even if the other ball has left the court, though the turn, of course, ends under Law 20c(1). However, the decision whether to remove the striker’s ball from the lawn depends in i) whether the striker’s ball is a rover (law 15) and ii) whether the game is being played under the laws of handicap play, in which case the striker’s partner ball must also be a rover (law 38) – unless Steve had a brainstorm and was trying to peg out his opponent’s only remaining ball!! Nothing must be taken for granted, and the referee must make himself aware of all relevant facts.
3. Red must be replaced on the yard line as the turn has ended under law 20c(1); see laws 12a(2) and 11b.
4. Although one could say that this is a case of the wrong player playing the right ball, it must be treated as playing the wrong ball. Nothing irregular took place until Bill played the black – he was allowed to place it for his partner (law 40b by implication, or laws 36a(2) and 40c(1) – so black is replaced where he placed it (law 22d(1)).
5. The corner ball is replaced in the corner; Syd’s ball in any legal position to take croquet from the corner ball, but not in the yard line area (law 22d(1)). The two bisques he took after playing the wrong ball are restored, but not the one before he played it (law 39a(1)). He can take another bisque to play with the correct ball (law 37a), in which case his ball is in hand (law 16c(1)) and may be placed anywhere in contact with the corner ball for the croquet stroke.
6. The opponent is wrong. Charlie has played when not entitled to do so, and the ball is replaced (law 25a applies, see law 37d(1)).A spectator referee may intervene if he hears a player giving erroneous information on the Laws to his adversary (regulation R5b).
7. Yes to both questions; law 37a only says a point may not be scored in a turn following a half bisque; law 14c allows the point to be made, since the ball has not become a ball in hand (unless in the subsequent stroke it is touching another ball law 16c(1)).
8. Such a referee is a referee on appeal. He may not decide that a fault has been committed (regulation R4d) unless he is satisfied of the fact by personal observation or by the evidence of the striker or a Spectator Referee who personally observed the fault (regulation R5d).
9. Both players have a duty to ensure that the clips are correctly placed and must call attention immediately to any misplaced clip (law 31e). Senga was at fault in not notifying Dennis but Dennis was responsible for the misplacement and is not therefore entitled to a replay (law 31a(1)).
10. Whether he has left the court or not, Jim had judged that his ball had come to rest without completing the running of the hoop and law 4e(1) had been satisfied. The ball is replaced where Jim believed it had stopped (law33d).

“……Near the village of Wimbledon, on the very brink of the railway that hurries you thither and then bears off the rest of the passengers towards Southampton, Bombay, Jamaica, or wherever they may wish to go, are four acres of grassy land. These acres are laid out in three terraces, the one above the other, and on each terrace are four croquet-grounds. Amongst these (the corners being cut off to make way for them) are sundry edifices, half haystack, half summer-house, but in a sleety wind or a blazing sun you will not in any way regret that the principle of beauty has been sacrificed to the consideration of utility. If ugly, these buildings are very commodious. A gay striped marquee, and a pavilion with a bar of ecclesiastical woodwork, complete the accommodation. I must mention, however, a dozen and a half gigantic white umbrellas stuck up on long poles all over the ground; these umbrellas tend to collect together round any important match.

          From a croquet point of view, these grounds are simple perfection. Each is forty yards by thirty, and shaved, I verily believe, every morning by some of Mr.Truefitt’s assistants, sent down on purpose. They are beautifully levelled and the pinks and blues of the rolling balls are resplendent in the sunshine. Croquet in the eyes of experts is not a mania, nor the imbecility of first or second childhood. It is a very fascinating and very difficult game, requiring nerve, judgement, unremitting attention, and great physical nicety. Judging from its effects on several lady and gentlemen enthusiasts, I think we may almost say already that it is the most absorbing game yet invented; and I can conceive some such enthusiasts imagining in their dreams some such croquet heaven as the Wimbledon ground in the dim cloudland of the hereafter.

          Early on Tuesday certain strange mallets, with their owners, were collected together at the Waterloo station – flat mallets, cylindrical mallets, heavy mallets, light mallets, - and soon the Wimbledon croquet ground began to fill. The prize for the lady champion is a challenge silver-gilt tête-à-tête service, handsome and massive. It is valued at twenty guineas, and it must be won three years running to entitle the winner to retain it.   The champion’s prize is a cup valued at fifty guineas and this disproportion in the matter of the sexes is due, not to the fact that a male croquet champion is considered a more valuable object than a female croquet champion, but to the fact that the gentlemen entries (from which the prize money is chiefly drawn) are more numerous than the entries of the ladies. Mrs Walsh was the lady champion last year; Mr Peel was the gentleman champion. The champions remain calm and quiescent whilst the all-comers are contesting for the victory, and then play the conqueror……”

 

This quaint description appeared in the account of an early croquet tournament at Wimbledon at the All England Croquet Club. Little was it realised in 1872 that by the early 1890’s croquet was to be all but ousted from Wimbledon by lawn tennis. It was not until 1877 that the first lawn tennis championship was held there.

          One may ponder how croquet tournaments have changed since those early days.   Of course the wearing apparel is one major difference (ankle-length dresses for the ladies with some astonishing hats, dark suits for the men, sometimes with jacket removed, with bowler hat or boater). The laws were then very different, not least because it was the sequence game, with a different court setting and 4-inch hoops. Only two years earlier the hoops were 6 inches wide. 

The tournaments must have been somewhat boring for the champions if remaining ‘calm and quiescent’ meant not playing at all until everyone else except one had been knocked out. Many clubs today have sundry edifices that provide shelter from ‘sleety wind or blazing sun’ although they no longer have thatched roofs, and so far as I know there is no club with a bar having a front with designs associated with church woodwork.

          Although different in many respects, the game today has this in common. It is still, for most of us at least, a ‘very fascinating and very difficult game, requiring nerve judgment, unremitting attention, and great physical nicety.’

 A miss is as good as a mile if we are trying to hit a ball, but a near miss is almost as good as a ‘hit’ if we are trying to rush a ball to a particular spot, e.g. a hoop. 

          The accuracy of the rush will of course depend on the distance apart of the two balls involved. The further apart they are, the less accurate the rush is likely to be – as every croquet player knows. But how does the accuracy of the rush compare with that of the long roquet – or, to put it another way, how close do the balls have to be to attain the same accuracy in a straight rush as in a simple long shot?

 

Fig.1: Cut rush showing Error in Aim (A) and Error in Rush (R) 

 

The answer to this kind of question can be found by reference to the diagram of a rush shown in Figure 1. Here X is the striker’s ball and he attempts a straight rush along the line XZ on the ball marked Z. In general there will be a slight error in his shot so that his ball will travel along the line XY. The error in this shot is equal to the angle marked A, and as a result of this error the roqueted ball Z will travel along a line that deviates from the required direction by the angle marked R. The straight rush has turned out to be a cut rush, albeit only a slight cut if the balls were close together to start with. The question is – how large is the angle R compared with the angle A for a given separation of the balls X and Z? 

          Some values of angle R for various values of angle A and separation between balls X and Z are shown in Table 1. The first column shows the error in the shot, i.e. angle A, in degrees. The remaining columns give the magnitude of angle R, the error in the rush, for various separations of the balls in the rush. The separations are measured in ‘ball spaces’, i.e. a value of 1 corresponds to a space of three and five eighths inches between the balls.

It will be seen that for small errors up to at least three degrees, the error in the rush is almost exactly proportional to the number of ball spaces. Thus, for an error in the shot of one degree, the error in the rush is also one degree for a ball space of one; two degrees for a ball space of two, and so on. This applies to all reasonable errors in a straight rush because 99% of the shots of the ‘average player’ (as defined by Dr.Grundy – see Croquet Gazette no.144, 1977) fall within three degrees of the aiming point.

          Thus to make our rush as accurate as our roquet, we must lay the rush with the balls separated by only one ball diameter. Note that we can make the rush ten times more accurate than our roquet by placing the balls only one tenth of a ball diameter apart, i.e. about one third of an inch apart. This is effectively what we do in the wafer cannon (see SWAN 14 (1995)) where we can arrange the balls by hand in the precise positions required. It is difficult to lay an ordinary rush as close as this – a slight bump in the ground may be sufficient to roll the ball aside. However, it is not necessary to go as close as this; one ball space is small enough, and this can be achieved easily with a little stop shot if the rush is to be laid near the spot where the roqueted ball came to rest.

          To convert the angles in Table 1 to distances on the court, an error of one degree corresponds to a miss by thirteen inches for a twenty-one yard shot, e.g. a shot or rush from Hoop 1 to Hoop 2. For the ‘average player’ about one third of his shots are in error by one degree or more. Although a roquet missing by thirteen inches is useless, a rush to within thirteen inches of the hoop is excellent and can easily be achieved from Hoop 1 to Hoop 2 with a ball separation of one ball diameter, provided of course that the strength can be judged correctly. On the other hand, with the balls of the rush one yard apart (about ten ball spaces) the corresponding error would be eleven feet!

          The beginner may well ask why do we not always lay the rush with one ball space between? The reason is that another factor has to be taken into account. A rush like this presents a perfect double to an enemy ball situated in a direction at right angles to the rush, and even if the rush is pointing directly at the enemy ball, the opponent will be tempted to shoot because if he misses it may not be possible to get him out into court AND regain your rush. The moral is therefore to wire at least one of the balls in such a short rush. To avoid leaving a tempting target for a long shot when the balls are not wired, the balls should be two to three feet apart: a foot is not enough, it still gives a considerably greater chance of a hit (see Croquet Gazette No.182, 1985).   

• The break should never be sacrificed for the sake of peels.
• Peeling requires good control of rushing, hoop approaches and hoop running.
• Make allowances for pull where a peel is attempted in a split shot

 

Types of Peel

 

Straight	The peel is completed immediately before making the same hoop with the striker’s ball.
After Hoop	The peel is completed immediately after making the same hoop but in the opposite direction. Examples of this would be peeling penultimate after running hoop 6 or peeling rover after running hoop 5.
Going to another Hoop	The peel is completed using a split croquet stroke with the striker’s ball going to the pioneer for its next hoop. Examples of this would be peeling rover going to a 2-back pioneer or again peeling rover but going to a 3-back pioneer.
Rush Peel	The peel is completed by rushing the peelee through its hoop. This is usually only successful if the peelee is either in the jaws of the hoop or very close and directly in front of the hoop.
Irish Peel	The peel is completed in the same stroke when running the same hoop with the striker’s ball.
Promotional Peel	The peel is completed by a croqueted or rushed ball causing the peelee to be peeled.

 

Pull.  

Peeling a ball using a roll shot will produce ‘pull’ on the croqueted ball (peelee) and the striker’s ball in the direction of the aiming line. Using a stop shot would produce less pull.

Diagram 1 illustrates the effect of pull when playing a roll shot in an attempt to peel a ball through a hoop.

 

The Peeling Wheel

  

The Peeling Wheel (Diagram 2) together with the associated chart is a ‘guide only’ to the amount of pull when a small split shot is played in the directions shown (X-A, X-M etc). The directional lines represent the Line of Aim (swing line of mallet). The amount of pull is shown as a figure 0-45, the least pull being 0 and the most pull being 45.

The assessments of the varying amount of pull shown in the charts are from experimentation and observation of different players and playing styles.

The weight of the mallet may also change the amount of pull on either or both balls. A stop shot would reduce the amount.

 

Anti-Pull. It is impossible for the balls to have a reverse pull effect if a roll shot is played hard, say peeling at penult and sending the striker’s ball to a pioneer at or past 2-back.

South West Federation History ~ Ray Ransom’s Farewell Address to the AGM

 

Cast your mind back to November 1984. Reagan had just won a second term as American president, the £1 note was withdrawn to be replaced by a coin and Charles was still married to Diana. The IBM Personal Computer had been in existence for just 3 years and the World Wide Web was still 5 years away. Most significant of all, the South West Federation of Croquet Clubs came into being on the 11^th of that month as the result of its very first AGM. Although the SWF has been in existence for just 24 years, this is in fact our 25^th AGM.

 

          Of the initial membership of 15 clubs only two, Coal Research and Tracy Park, are no longer with us. Current membership stands at over 35 clubs, a very satisfying growth, and certainly we are the most successful of the 9 Federations in terms of recruitment.

 

          Initial funding was provided by sponsorship of £250 from the Cheltenham and Gloucester Building Society and a grant of £957 from the S W Regional Sports Council. The negotiations were carried out by Ian Maugham, John McCullough and Martin Murray. The S W Sports Council also made direct grants to a number of SWF clubs.

 

          Martin Murray was the first Chairman and steered the Federation through the first 3 years of its existence. John McCullough played a major role in the formation of the SWF and was its secretary from inception to his departure to York in early 1988. John was also instrumental in setting up the National coaching scheme. Ian Maughamacted as treasurer for the Federation from 1984 to his untimely death in March 2000. Our strength owes much to Ian's financial management. The fourth member of the committee was Peter Dyke, and although he had no initial defined responsibilities he later became Schools' Officer and did sterling work in the development of youth croquet.

 

          Team competitions started in 1985 with the Senior and Beginners' Leagues. Bath hosted both finals with Bristol winning the Senior match against Nailsea, and Parkstone (now East Dorset) were successful in the Beginners' match against Bath. 8 teams played in the Senior League and 11 in the Beginners' League. In subsequent competitions the League names were changed to 'The Federation League' and 'The B League'. An Intermediate League was added in 1990, the two Advanced Leagues in 1994 and 1999 and the Golf Croquet League in 2006. So compared to the 19 teams taking part in 1985 we see the 2008 totals of 77 Association and 20 Golf Croquet teams competing.

 

          This growth has meant more work for committee members, and since inception the committee has grown from 4 to its current level of 9 following the additions of Coaching Officer, League Secretary, Publicity Officer, Development Officer and Golf Croquet Adviser.

 

          The South West Area Newsletter (SWAN) has been continuously (with the exception of the 1999 issue) produced since 1985. Initially it was produced twice a year, in April and October, and each consisted of 4 sides of A4. The April edition provided news and Club profiles whilst that for October gave match and other results. The Cheltenham and Gloucester Building Society undertook the printing. In 1988 it reduced to an annual newsletter and in 1993 C & G sponsorship ceased. In 1995 SWAN switched to the format which we see today. From what I remember the 1999 edition was never produced since it resided on a laptop which was stolen from the back of a car. So even the SWF is not immune to data theft - I don't know whether the information was encrypted!

 

Since issue 18 (April 2000) Sue Mackay has been producing SWAN and has made a first class job of it. SWAN is the envy of the other federations. Sue has also produced and maintains the SWF website containing comprehensive data on past results together with news items and information for clubs and individual players.

 

Throughout its existence the aims of the Federation have been to promote croquet in the South West and to develop facilities for playing the game by encouraging new and established clubs. I am sure that you will agree with me that the Federation has more than met its aims.

Most players when first reading the new GC Laws book will be very mystified when they read the provisions for wrong ball play and it will make problem solution at club level extremely difficult. There is however a very simple way to resolve such issues.

• It is a matter of application of the law that you can play as many wrong balls as you like and not a single thing will happen until a player or referee says “Stop, someone has played a wrong ball”  (NOTE: Spectators should keep quiet)
• Don’t bother to go through the process of working out when things went wrong, the law does not require this. Just start at who played which ball just before the game was stopped.

There are only three possible solutions for any wrong ball situation. 

 

Full Penalty (FP) – The opponent of the player of the last ball chooses whether all balls moved in the last stroke are left where they lie or replaced where they were before the stroke was played and any points scored in that stroke are cancelled. The same opponent can then choose which of his own balls he wants to play to continue the game.

Reset and Replay (RAR) – All balls moved in the last stroke are replaced where they were before the stroke was played and any points scored in that stroke are cancelled. The stroke is then replayed with the correct ball.

Carry On Play (COP) – The player who played the last stroke has played a correct ball and condoned all previous errors. Play continues in the sequence set by the last ball and all points scored in previous strokes count.

 

THE WAY TO DECIDE WHICH SOLUTION APPLIES
If the last shot was played by:
SINGLES	DOUBLES
a player who is entitled to play but plays a shot with an opponent's ball, FP applies.	the player whose turn it is to play, as defined by the colour sequence from the previous ball played,  but who plays with either his partner's or opponent's ball, FP applies
the same player who played the previous shot, FP applies	a player from a side not entitled to play, FP applies
a player who plays one of his own balls after his opponent has played a ball which does not belong to him, FP applies. (Seems rather unfair that he should be penalised in this matter but that’s what the law says)	a player playing a ball he is allowed to play from the side whose turn it is to play but plays a ball that does not follow the colour sequence of the previous ball played, FP applies unless the previous stroke was a wrong ball in which case COP applies
a player who plays one of his own balls out of sequence with the previous ball played but commits a striking fault, FP applies	a player who plays his own ball after the opposing side have played the previous stroke unlawfully in any way. COP applies and the sequence is reset to the last stroke played
a player who is entitled to play and plays a ball he is entitled to play but out of sequence with the previous colour played, RAR applies	all other cases COP applies

 

NOTE  You never have to go back more than one stroke prior to the last stroke except in doubles where it is necessary to check the legality of the penultimate stroke.

This practice routine is designed to help with:

• angled hoop running,
• the slight pull associated with gentle take-offs
• the five to seven yard roquet to the boundary ball
• the familiarisation of stalking the ball

 

Start by placing a ball 12 inches in front of Hoop 1 as Y1 and another ball on the West yard line as R1. Run Hoop 1 to position Y2. Roquet R1, then take off back to position Y1. Notice the First Stalk Line leading to the stance position of the striker at Hoop1, also the Second Stalk Line leading to the stance position for the roquet. Observe also the Walk Lines A and B which act as a reminder to the striker as to the route that should be taken for stalking.

The Angled Hoop stroke should be aligned as illustrated above. The right hand side of the mallet head, the right side of the ball and the inside of the right hoop wire should all be in line. If the stalk has been correctly adhered to then the mallet will arrive at the centre of the ball automatically. A very smooth stroke should be played, making the ball roll, not skidding at the hoop.

The first time that you play a double-banked game, the idea of 8 balls on one lawn can be quite daunting. In many games, you hardly notice the other game, as you never seem to get in one another’s way, but occasionally there are games when you want to be in the same spot at the same time. There are a few simple rules which help to make games run smoothly.

1. When starting your turn always stop before you step onto the lawn to check that you are not walking across the path of the person in play.
2. Be aware of the other game, whilst in play  -  it is easy to become so engrossed in your game that you become oblivious to the other game.
3. Mark any ball that may be in the way of your shot, having first obtained permission from the person in play.  If in any doubt MARK IT – operator error can result in balls going off course.
4. Replace any marked balls before you play your next shot and at the same time let the players from the other game know.
5. If both games want the same hoop (the usual place a bottleneck occurs) then give way to the person there first. If you arrive together, then give way to the person most likely to get out of the way first. If in any doubt, give way to the game with the least marking to be done.

When marking balls please remember to use plastic markers, NEVER metal ones or coins which, if forgotten to be picked up, can cause immense damage to a mower.

Mark balls accurately by taking either the peg or the wire of a hoop as a guide and place the marker behind the ball in question before lifting it. If in any doubt as to how to mark the ball, then use two markers and place them either side of the ball.

If a ball is in a critical position it should not be marked; you should wait until it is cleared.  If it is going to hold up your game too much, then it must be marked very carefully, preferably by a referee.

Full details on Double Banking can be found in the Laws of Association Croquet - LAW 52.