Info for Your Squashgame

5 let limit

Published: 30 Mar 2010 - 08:19 by aprice1985

Updated: 20 Apr 2010 - 07:28

Subscribers: Log in to subscribe to this post.

 I see from one of the squash news site that apparently in the US they will now be limited to 5 lets per player and after that only stroke or no let can be called, does this risk more dangerous play from pros?

squash game squash extras How to add images to Members' Forum posts and replies here...


Please Note: The most recent replies are now at the top!

From rippa rit - 20 Apr 2010 - 07:28

Really the rules should stay for the average player, and the rest be optional formats to suit the particular competition.  We have players who were brought up with the two serve rule and they still want to play like that, and they still want to play the "hand in" hand out" rules too and do not want to recognise the changes.  Sports, in the main have changed their formats to suit the length of the comp and the TV appeal.  The TV appeal is not for the average Jo Blow squash player, and if the pros can get more money, and better sponsorship through changing the format they have to go for it I reckon. Look at Rugby, the more blood noses, the more fist fights, the more scandal, the higher the gate takings at matches, and the more pages taken up in the media....silly, but true.


Back to top

From drop-shot - 20 Apr 2010 - 02:20   -   Updated: 20 Apr 2010 - 02:26

 I am sorry, I do disagree with these additions to the rules. All of this creates mess and confusion. This way squash will NEVER become olympic neither respected sport. Complications. and more complications. Please don't forget those rules are understood ONLY by us.

Back to top

From hamburglar - 20 Apr 2010 - 02:01   -   Updated: 20 Apr 2010 - 02:03

That would be hilarious to hit your let limit, and if they pull a Chris Webber (Michigan basketball player who turned the ball over by calling a timeout when Michigan didn't have any) by calling a let when they're out of lets, then they lose the point!

I think if you're out of Lets, you can stop the play, but the only allowable calls will be No Let or Stroke.


Back to top

From rippa rit - 16 Apr 2010 - 08:08

hamburglar - that reasoning makes a lot of sense.  So when a player gets 5 lets it becomes play on 'cos you cannot send him off court, or can you?

Back to top

From hamburglar - 16 Apr 2010 - 04:25   -   Updated: 16 Apr 2010 - 04:28

I think the 5-let idea is a great start to a more continuous game.

However the only way I can see it working is to charge either the hitter or the non-hitter with a let. Sort of like basketball, each player going hard to the net/ball is risking a foul call.

If player B obstructs A and A asks for a let, if the referee agrees let, then player B is charged a let. This will in general make the non-hitting player try to avoid interference.

If the ref calls No Let, then Player A is charged a let.

If the ref calls Stroke, then neither player is charged a let.

I can see instances where both players will keep the ball in play with easy shots just to keep the referees out of it, or at times late in games, if a players has lots of lets saved up and the other does not, they'll block a bit more to worry the player with fewer lets remaining.


Back to top

From rippa rit - 11 Apr 2010 - 20:42

The Franklin and Marshall College are using the 5 let rule and you can read some of the comments by players, particularly John White's comments.

Back to top

From rippa rit - 09 Apr 2010 - 07:04

yeah I think that Referee education factor would be worth more to the game than changing the rules, as no matter what the rules there will be arguments, and a "no nonsense" ref would clamp out alot of that.  In my book it would be better value for clubs to be spending more time on Ref education than on rule changes.  Yeah, the public do like rebel sportsman too, and to witness an argument or fight. All the ideas are worth a trial period with feedback going to the authorities I reckon.  What suits the pros does not have to suit the ordinary clubbies either, and we keep forgetting that.


Back to top

From aprice1985 - 08 Apr 2010 - 21:24

Drop shot, sorry but I found the article the day I wrote this post, 29th March, bit early for the april fools.  Rita sorry about the link but I thought people would want to read the exact rules, they are fairly detailed and clearly worded by lawyers (or pedants)

Ray I am interested in the idea of rewarding more attacking play, this sounds like picking the style you like and promoting it, different players play in different ways and whoever wins, wins.  My feeling is that already with PARS (which my club league has just with no discussion by players converted to) and a lower tin the professional circuit is trying to get more attacking play.  This is grand for a spectator sport but not so good for those who play at club level with no spectators and want to continue with what to me is a more tactically based defensive game, Jonah Barrington was saying something similar in an article i read recently.

I agree that the game needs to flow more but the rules do allow that, referees just need to apply them more and possibly be more aggressive with strokes and no lets rather than viewing a let as an easy way out.

Back to top

From rippa rit - 04 Apr 2010 - 10:19

Hey, how did that squashsite link get there...ummh I am a speed reader, so speedy I missed it! Just read the article and thought it reminded me of the Hawkeye tennis senario where a player then has to decide if it was important enough to appeal for the let.  I agree, let every clus in the world try it out for a season to see how it goes/improves/hingers the play.

Back to top

From drop-shot - 04 Apr 2010 - 06:59   -   Updated: 04 Apr 2010 - 06:59

Hey guys - easy on that topic from Squshsite- it was dated April Foll's Day

Back to top

From raystrach - 02 Apr 2010 - 08:59

anything that can keep the game more flowing is a good thing. a while back i was trying to put together a set of rules where no lets would apply (only stroke or no let) and there would be other benefits for attack.

the idea behind it was to change the attitude of the players - more akin to the pros where they mostly make every effort to play on.

maybe 5 lets would be a good compromise

Back to top

From rippa rit - 30 Mar 2010 - 08:49

That is interesting on the "let" issue.  The rule is probably being trialled as the final decision globally would have to come from the WSF.  Some Associations have put in local rules on things like "turning" which I think is a bit unnecessary, and it would be better to teach players how to move/stand correctly on court instead of standing/moving in places on court that will encourage dangerous play.

The 5 let rule will cause more arguments I reckon.  Why?  Some players just move on court without much regard for the position of their opponent and think it is ok to impede the opponent getting to the ball; some players are just awkward movers and cannot seem to help themselves; some players are taught to crowd as a tactic and to annoy the opponent. 

Back to the rule - So 5 lets per player no matter what the circumstances? Or, 5 lets per player for interference, and then, just go for it might be a bit dangerous.

Keep us posted on how it goes.  Most top players can avoid lets due to their anticipation and movement but the amateurs might be in a bit of strife all round.

Back to top

Sorry, only members can post replies on this and all other Members` Forum items.

Join Here - It`s fast and it`s free!

Check other member benefits here...

Support Squashgame

Support us here at! If you think we helped you, please consider our Squash Shop when purchasing or make a small contribution.

Products Now Available

US Squash Shop



Squash Balls


Squash Rackets

Sport and Leisure

Video Games