Shots made from very deep in the court are often difficult. A fundamental strategy of squash is to put opponents in that position. Once an opponent is pushed to the back it is frustrating when they request a let. More often than not, the get out of jail let (added italic markup) is for a boast. A deterrent would be for referees to consistently reject the requests. At the very least, reject all boasts which would not reach the front wall fairly.

Although turning is not mentioned in the rules, this topic has more written about it than any other play in hard ball doubles. It is one of the most contentious issues. Turning frequently has the striker playing a ball from a very deep position. The striker often loses sight of the opponents, and the situation can be dangerous. Opponents are encouraged to clear to the side walls. The striker seldom requests a let when they are well positioned to play the ball directly to the front wall or a side wall well up the court. When the striker is not well positioned it is tempting to request a let. Referees can discourage players from requesting lets;—reject all ineligible boasts. It should be clear that lets should not be used to get out of a difficult position. On the other hand, the opponents should be sure to clear and not give an excuse for get out of jail lets.

Rule 5 a iiiThe last sentence of Rule 5 a iii also directs referees to reject questionable lets. The Referee shall deny a let to the striker when in the opinion of the referee the striker could have played the ball safely, but instead requested a let to get out of an unfavourable position.

In many situations the striker has many options. In general terms there are two types of shot available, a shot directly to the front wall or a boast. A striker that is well positioned has the choice. The opponents must allow the striker to play a front wall shot or a boast as stated in Rule 5 a iii.

When a player interferes with a direct to front wall shot the quoted sentence above does not mean the striker must choose a safe boast if available. Similarly, when a player interferes with a viable boast, the striker is not compelled to play a safe shot directly to the front wall. Furthermore, when an opponent takes away the opportunity to play a ball directly to a portion of the front wall but leaves a clear opportunity to play the ball to other portions of the front wall, the striker is not compelled to choose the safe shots. It is interference when any portion of the front wall is obscured. It is interference when either a front wall shot, or a boast is prevented. Having other safe options available does not negate the interference.

Having said that, the spirit of the game is to play the ball when there are viable opportunities. High level players are able to see at once many opportunities and choose an effective alternative despite interference. Less skilled players often approach the ball with a single shot in mind. When an opponent interferes with that shot, the striker is fully entitled to request a let and get no less than an awarded let. High level players are also quick to clear for most shots their opponents may choose. High level players are far less likely to request a let when the decision will just be a let. But the choice is in the hands of the striker to request a let for ball flight interference or play on. When a referee feels that they themselves would have just played the ball and not asked for let, that should not negate a legitimate let request.