In petanque, the team that has the boule closest to the jack is said to “have the point”. The team that does __not__ have the point throws next, and continues to throw until it either gains the point or exhausts its supply of boules. There are, however, two situations in which neither of the two teams has the point. In French such a situation is called a *point nul*, which can be translated into English as an **undecided point**.

- An
**equidistant boules situation**occurs when the best boules of the two teams are equally distant from the jack. In actual play, it occurs most frequently when two boules are both touching the jack. You will occasionally see the opinion expressed that in an equidistant boules situation both boules have the point, but that is wrong. The point is*nul*. Neither boule has the point.

- An
**empty terrain situation**occurs when no boules are left on the terrain. It occurs when the terrain is empty because all of the boules have been (purposely or accidentally) shot, knocked, or thrown out-of-bounds.

In these situations neither team has the point, so we need some additional rule to determine which team throws next. That rule can be found in Article 28.

The team that played the last boule plays again, then the opposing team, and so on alternately until the point belongs to one of them.

I find it helpful to think of the situation this way. When a team throws a boule that creates an undecided point, the game enters a kind of tie-breaker mode.

- In tie-breaker mode, the teams throw alternately until one of the teams gains the point and breaks the tie.

- In tie-breaker mode, the first boule is thrown by the team whose boule created the undecided point. That team gets a chance, as it were, to resolve the uncertainty that they created.

There are two situations where players have trouble in knowing how to apply this procedure. Both start with an equidistant boules situation.

**SITUATION A — All of the boules are shot out, leaving the terrain empty**

Team A throws boule A1. Team B throws boule B1, which ends up exactly equidistant from the jack. Now A1 and B1 are equidistant. In throwing B1, team B created an undecided point, so team B starts the tie-breaker by throwing boule B2.Team B throws boule B2, trying to shoot A1. But B2 knocks both of the other boules out of bounds and itself rolls out of bounds. The result is that there are no boules left on the terrain. Which team plays next?

One commenter on the BOULISTENAUTE forum suggested that since the game had gone from an equidistant boules situation to an empty terrain situation, “it is a new undecided point” (*c’est un nouveau point nul*), so the team whose throw created the situation (team B) plays again. But that is wrong. The point is still undecided, so alternate play continues. Since team B threw last (boule B2), team A throws next.

**SITUATION B — One of the equidistant boules is exactly replaced**

Team A throws boule A1. Team B throws boule B1, which ends up exactly equidistant from the jack. Now A1 and B1 are equidistant. In throwing B1, team B created an undecided point, so team B starts the tie-breaker by throwing boule B2.Team B throws boule B2, trying to shoot A1. But the shot misses and instead hits Team B’s own boule, B1. The shot knocks B1 away and exactly replaces B1 with B2. Now, A1 and B2 are equidistant. Which team plays next?

As before, some players argue that team B should play next because “It is a new case.” As Mike Pegg says, “It is a different boule.” (See also THIS.) But that is wrong. The point is still undecided, so alternate play continues. Since team B threw last (boule B2), team A throws next.

In both of these situations the incorrect answers are based on the observation that things have changed— one or both of the equidistant boules has moved— so in some sense we now have “a new situation”. The problem with these answers is that they confuse creation of a new situation with resolving an undecided point. YES, the situation has changed. But NO, the point hasn’t been decided. It is still the case that neither team has the point. So alternate play continues.

Let me repeat what I said earlier. The whole point of the procedure described in Article 28 is to provide a mechanism for deciding which team throws next when neither team holds the point. And the procedure that it provides is simple and straightforward— the teams play alternately until one of them has the point.

```
Article 15
```

If the first boule played goes into an out-of-bounds area, it is for the opponent to play, then alternately as long as there are no boules in the in-bounds area. If no boule is left in the in-bounds area after a shooting throw or a pointing throw, apply the provisions of Article 28 concerning an undecided point *(point nul)*.
Article 28 – Boules equidistant from the jack

When the two boules closest to the jack belong to different teams and are at an equal distance from it... If both teams still have boules, the team that played the last boule plays again, then the opposing team, and so on alternately until the point belongs to one of them.

A very well written article but the rule annoys me and sometimes teams will end up playing bowls (alternately) rather than pétanque. In my opinion (and I know this is not how the game should continue), a boule that lands the same distance away from the jack as your opponents, doesn’t beat it. Therefore the team that threw last, should throw again until either, they get closer (normal rules) or run out of boules… much less confusing and more logical.