Matters Arising, also known as Martyn's Newsletters, is a weekly bulletin of ideas relating to hands played at the club F2F on Mondays and third Thursdays, and on BBO on Tuesdays and other Thursdays. Most of the articles concern declarer play, and whilst the odd squeeze or other play normally associated with strong players appear, most articles are aimed at average players. The date associated with each issue listed below is that of the Monday of the week of hands under consideration.

2024

2023

2022

This is hand 10 from Thursday 21 May 2020. Everyone is vulnerable.
East is dealer and opens 1♠. South bids 2♦, partner passes and North passes.

What should you be thinking and what do you bid?

Click Show Answer below.

This is a hand 28 from Thursday 7 November 2019 as reported by Jill Rushton.

It is a cold 6♥ slam involving a squeeze and endplay, executed with flair by Mike Howse against me and my partner, for an outright top!

How do you plan the play in 6♥ by North on the lead of ♣6 or ♦J? (You will discover that West has 5 spades and East has 4 hearts!)

This is a hand from Thursday 26 September 2019. Malcolm Hartley noticed an interesting feature about the effect of the opening lead.

North passed, East opened 1♣ and South overcalled 2♠. West decided to double, North passed and East bid 3NT which closed the auction.
What would you lead?
 

This is a hand from Tuesday 10 September 2019.

West opened 1♠ (minimum but able to cope with any response from partner) and East raised to 4♠.  All the other Souths thought "only 15 points - one not working"  - and passed. I reckoned that partner must be short in spades so there must be a play for 5♣ and bid it. West, with nothing to spare, should have passed but East (6 losers) would have protected (5♦, to show the double fit, would have been better than 5♠). However West pushed on immediately to 5♠.  As South, I had no reason to suspect that this was not making so I "sacrificed" in 6♣, doubled by West. The lead was ♦K, as West suspected correctly that ♠A would be ruffed. This was no more successful as 13 tricks are cold on any lead against a club or heart slam.

At all the other tables declarer made 10 tricks in 4♠ when North failed to find a diamond lead. Indeed best defence (impossible to find at the table) would defeat 4♠ by 3 tricks. Seeing all the hands, can you do better?

Philip Wraight

With the East hand, how would you respond if West opens 1NT?

You know partner has a balanced hand with 12-14 points so there are a combined 33 to 35 points. It is obvious to respond 6NT. Yet of 9 EW pairs, the only ones to reach this contract were Bob Boyd and Dorothy Bayliss. Well done.

At Pairs, how do you play 6NT on a club or spade lead? (Remember that to do well at pairs the overtrick is important). The East/West hands are:

When you play clubs, you find that the suit breaks 3-2. You pause and discover you have 12 tricks (5 clubs, 3 spades, 2 hearts and 2 diamonds).  Can you see any possibility of making a 13th trick?  (This could be important to get a good score if the whole field is in 6N as they should be).  It is particularly important for the two pairs who have overbid to 7C and 7NT respectively!

This is hand 11 from the 2019 St. Mary's Hospice Sims. The Kendal heat was on Monday 24th June 2019.

South passed. The first issue is whether West should open the bidding with a 12 point 4441 hand. It is the worst possible shape and usually plays badly. Here West decided to open 1♦ (the middle of 3 touching suits). It is a borderline decision and might work out badly if partner bids 1♠ or 1NT (West then has to rebid 2♣).

North overcalled 2♣ and East bid 2♥. Since 2♥ is a higher ranking suit than opener's it should show 6 (or a good 5) card suit and at least 10 points. South passed and West was delighted to raise to 3♥. So what should East do next?

It is wrong to ask for aces when you have a void. You need to know which controls your partner has.

So East should bid 3♠. Since hearts have been agreed this is not a natural bid. It shows a spade control (usually the ace or a void) and shows slam interest, playing in hearts. West now bids 4♦ which shows a diamond control and, very importantly, denies a club control (otherwise West would have bid 4♣). This is excellent news for East since the void isn't wasted (which it would be if West had the ♣A). Now it makes sense for East to ask for aces with the knowledge that West doesn't have the ♣A. So East bids 4NT and West responds 5♣ showing 3 key cards, which must be the ♦A, ♥A and ♥K. East can now confidently bid 6♥ slightly worried that 7♥ might make.

So the full bidding was:

1. Cue bid showing slam interest in hearts
2. Cue bid denying the ability to cue bid in a lower ranking suit
3. Roman key card Blackwood
4. 3 key cards

The slam was bid by only 13 out of 35 pairs.

How do you play the hand on a club lead?

This is hand 9 from Monday 18th March 2019
Most tables bid to 4♥ or 3NT, making from 9 to 11 tricks, but one pair bid the 6♥ slam. North and South passed throughout.
North led ♣10, taken by ♣K in dummy. There are 8 tricks off the top plus a ninth after forcing out the ♦A. Where do you find the extra 3 tricks?

Board 8 from Tuesday was of some interest, coming so soon after the seminar on defence.

The first question is what should South bid after three passes?

While it is sometimes right to open the bidding 4th in hand with only 10 points, the relevant question here is "Who has the spades?". Only one pair out of five passed  - well done Wendy Nuttall - and was rewarded with a near top. (In 4 other cases East had opened the bidding light). A good rule to use to help decide whether to open 4th in hand is the "rule of 15". Add your points to the number of spades and bid only if it comes to 15 or more.

My partner opened 1♦ and the bidding proceeded

I (North) led ♦7, ♦6 from dummy and you win with the ♦K, declarer playing ♦8.

How do you plan to defeat the contract and what do you lead to trick 2?

Hint - what is the significance of the card partner led? Which diamonds can you not see, and who has them?
 

The final NBL match of the season took place on Saturday 6 October. Both Westmorland teams didn't do very well this year, although the B division team had a good finish. The full results are on the Westmorland website.

Philip Wraight has written up board 19 from the first half, which he played in the C division match.

I was dealer South. With KJ104 over dummy's bid suit it looked as if the only possible way to defeat the contract was to attract a spade lead so I doubled (double of a freely bid NT slam suggests leading dummy's first bid suit). Sally duly led ♠9 and declarer, after some thought played A. Now everything depended on the play of the club suit. See below for how this worked out.

There were a variety of results at other tables. Five pairs, including Westmorland's opponents in the other section, were in 6♣ - always making at least 12 tricks even with a wrong guess in how to play the trumps. (Note that at teams you need to be in the safest slam. It is difficult to understand why East bid 1♠. A 2♣ should lead to a contract of 6♣.) Our immediate team-mates did not try for slam and made 11 tricks in 3NT.

Seven other pairs were in 6NT, including our pair in the other section. All received a neutral heart lead. Three of them managed to go off (including our other team mates). How did they manage to do so? How would you have played as declarer?

The way Board 7 was played represented an interesting defensive problem which I only partially solved. I was East and the bidding was:

I led ♦9 which drew 2 from partner and Q from declarer who now erred by not starting on the trumps. She played ♥A and ♥K then ruffed ♥4 with ♠5 (despite my vulnerable 2-level overcall almost certainly promising a 6 card suit). Now the roof fell in. Partner overruffed with ♠8 and played ♣3 to my ♣A. I returned ♣8, to make it clear I didn't have ♣Q. After winning ♣K, partner reluctantly finally switched to a diamond, ruffed with ♠2. Now a heart was ruffed in dummy with ♠9 and over-ruffed with ♠J and another diamond was ruffed with ♠10. At this stage I took my eyes off the ball! We had already defeated a solid contract by 1 trick for what I thought would be a good score. I could not believe that partner still had K trumps (I vaguely assumed declarer had not over-ruffed J with K for fear of losing trump control) so I exited passively with a club and declarer was relieved to win the rest of the tricks. If I had continued with another heart, we make two more tricks, coming to ♠Q and ♠K separately by ruffs, whether declarer ruffs with ♠A or not.

Learning points.
1. This is another example of the recurring theme - "To draw trumps or not to draw trumps? - that is the question".  Here the lead was clearly a singleton and there is a danger of defensive ruffs. Furthermore there was no benefit in trying for a heart ruff as declarer had enough tricks for the contract in diamonds, if trumps could be drawn.
2.  South should have opened 1NT, not 1♦. Now North will bid 2NT, eliminating the possibility of a lead-directing heart bid. South will pass and the only uncertainty is how many overtricks will be made!

Philip Wraight

Please use the form below if you have any comments or questions.

We were pleased with the bidding on this hand in the NBL teams match on Saturday 11 August.

South has shown a distributional strong hand.
¹ 4♦ is forcing and shows slam interest
² 4♠ shows at least 6 hearts and 5 spades
³ 4NT is Roman Key Card Blackwood asking in first bid suit (Hearts)
⁴ 0 or 3 Key Cards (although the answer should have been 2 with ♥Q!
⁵ sign off - not sure now but setting the suit
⁶ I still think slam will make after partner bid a slam try with 4♦ and ace-asking so bid 6♥

West leads ♦8. Plan the play.

This is board 3 from Tuesday 31 July. The bidding should be straightforward.

¹ Stayman
² An alternative second bid by East would be 4♦, if this would be a splinter in your system. Here West would not be interested and would sign off in 4♥. But if the West hand had been something like
Qx
KJxx
Axxx
KJx
or
QJ
KQ43
9875
KQ9
then a heart slam would be a near certainty.

However the play is the thing. At all seven tables, North led ♣J against the heart game. You should now make 12 tricks, but at three tables declarer managed only 9 tricks, 10 tricks at one table and 11 tricks at three others.

How would you have played to do better?
Hint.
1) What can you deduce from the ♣J lead? Is it from length or shortage? Who has ♣Q?
2) Having answered 1), which opponent is likely to have length in hearts, including the Q?

This is board 6 from Tuesday 18 July. Firstly, how should the bidding go? At our table (I was South and Libby Willoughby North) it was straightforward, EW passing throughout.

It is important, at pairs, even with a void, to be in 3NT not 5♣, as two out of six North/Souths were. Perhaps South incorrectly responded 1♥ not 1♦ at the two tables where South ended in 5♣, as South would then have been very worried about the diamonds (an unbid suit).

East led ♠8. Plan the play to give yourself the best chance of 11 tricks. (If you play ♠9 from dummy, West will cover with ♠10).

West opens 2♥ and North overcalls 2♠. What should East bid?

With a flat 10 point hand it might not be obvious to make a pre-emptive raise to 4♥. But, especially at this vulnerability and applying the Law of Total Tricks, it is the best bid. 4♥ is unlikely to make but if it doesn't then North/South must have a game on. The excellent 4♥ bid puts North/South in difficulty. If Tony Forrester (who I believe plays negative doubles up to 7 hearts!) were South, he would know what to do, but for most club players, double would be more penalty oriented. 5♣ is too unilateral, and risks missing a diamond fit, so South must pass (not too slowly, which would make it more difficult ethically for North). Since East/West have a fit, North/South must have a fit. If it is not in spades (which South has not supported), it must be in diamonds. Furthermore North has only 5 losers which suggests bidding on. So, in spite of the vulnerability, North must bid 5♦. South's hand has suddenly become huge. It would be feeble not to go on to 6♦.

The play in a diamond contract also raises points of interest. Two pairs got to game in diamonds and both managed to go one off. The deal is a good example of the "to draw trumps or not to draw trumps" conundrum. Here setting up one of the black suits by ruffing, and then drawing trumps would lead easily to 12 tricks (13 on a non-heart lead).

Philip Wraight

Board 26 from the teams session on 1 February was a textbook example of using elimination play to overcome a bad trump break.

¹ Transfer to spades

The bidding is routine. At Pairs there might be a temptation for South to try 3NT instead of 4♠ in case the same number of tricks were available in either contract, but at Teams the safer contract is essential.

W leads ♦Q. Plan the play. Hint - can you avoid four losers and guard against a bad trump break?

Please use the form below if you have any comments.

Board 17 on Thursday 4th January 2108 was an example of what "might have been". A very difficult hand to sort out in the limited time available at the table.
At our table the bidding was

¹ 1NT is an alternative - either could be right but the singleton club is perhaps in favour of the double.
² Directional asking bid.
³ Slightly pushy but it is Teams. 9 tricks may depend on whether or not the clubs come in.

How should North play 3NT on the lead of ♠10 - ducked by West after some thought?

There are two possible lines of play, both of which could be scuppered by communication problems.

a) Set up the clubs.
b) Play to make 3 spades, 4 hearts, a diamond and ♣A.

Please use the form below if you have any comments.

A hand of the week submitted by Philip Wraight

Maxim: when a contract appears to be lay-down, look out for hidden problems, but when it appears impossible, go for any chance however unlikely.
This hand illustrates the latter situation. It was played at U3A (Chicago) on Friday 24 November so can be treated as teams tactics rather than pairs.

Playing basic Acol, I opened 1♣ (not 1♠) as South with a view to subsequently buying the contract in NT at the appropriate level. My partner responded 3♣ (not playing inverted minor raises). Now what? At Pairs it would be routine to rebid 3NT. At Teams a club contract looked safer, but should it be game or slam? I could see no sensible way to explore and simply punted 6♣, hoping there was no club loser and that with first round controls in all the other suits it would be possible to develop 12 tricks without losing two.

LHO led ♠K and partner was concerned about the 3♣ bid.

Point for discussion - should one count minor suit losers if a NT contract is still a possiblity? My view is, only on very distributional hands, prepared to pull a NT contract back to the minor. Again it may be different at teams or pairs. At the latter I think a raise to the 2level is better.

Plan the play. (Trumps split 2-1. If West gains the lead they will switch to a red suit).
 

A hand of the week submitted by Philip Wraight

This is the first hand we played in the final B division NBL match.
I thought we bid well to get to 6♥ by South. Sally (North) opened 1NT and broke my 2♦ transfer with 2NT (14 points, 4 Hearts and no small doubleton). Looking at just the NS hands the slam is odds on. There is no heart loser if the suit breaks 2-2 or if Q is singleton. Failing this you could fall back on the spade finesse. Can you improve on that line, assuming that you have a heart loser? The lead was ♦6.

In the B division 6♥ was bid 6 times (3 by North, 3 by South) but no-one made it. The other 10 pairs played in 4♥.
In the A division 6♥ was bid 3 times (1 by North, 2 by South) but no-one made it. One pair were in 6NT down 1 and the other 8 played in 4♥.
In the C division 6♥ was bid 3 times (1 by North, 2 by South) but no-one made it. The other 9 played in 4♥.
Can you do better?
(6♥ by North is much more difficult in practice so Sally and Philip did well to play it from the South hand)

Two further questions posed by Mike Rothwell:
How do you play the heart suit to guarantee making at least 4 tricks no matter what the heart distribution?
How do you play the heart suit to give the best chance of making 5 tricks?

Those who attended the recent "Teams Tactics" seminar should have benefited when playing this hand from Thursday 7 September.
There is a safety play which is almost the same as an example that we discussed.

1. At teams, how do you play the hearts to give the best chance of 4 tricks?

At match-pointed pairs the tactics are different. So how you would play the suit at pairs.
Assume that you have plenty of entries to both North and South. Just take the heart suit in isolation (you should normally consider the bidding and lead).

2. How do you play the hearts at pairs (i.e. to maximise the number of tricks)?

3. How would you play this hand at pairs if East opens 2♦ showing 8 playing tricks in diamonds and leads ♦A

Mike Rothwell

This is a hand submitted by Philip Wraight from Thursday 31 August.

¹ Not strong enough to reverse to 2♦. Only 3 trumps but they may be useful for ruffing hearts.
² Only 11 points but 6 losers now that spades are agreed and partner opened the bidding. You also hope (wrongly) that ♣Q is a useful card.

Plan the play in 4♠ if
a)  The lead is 7♦
b) West cashes ♥A (after East overcalled hearts during the auction) and switches to 7♣
c) W leads 7♣  (if you play small from dummy, E will win ♣K and switch to ♠6)

This is a hand sumbitted by Philip Wraight from Tuesday 11 July supervised play. What should North bid after South has opened 1NT, and why?

Hints
What should North have been thinking? With a good 7-card heart suit, first round controls in both minors and knowing the combined HCPs are 28-30, game in hearts is a certainty and slam a possibility. The latter is unlikely unless partner has ♥K, and either ♠A or ♠KQ, when it becomes odds on, because the defence cannot cash two early tricks.

A transfer followed by 4NT should show 5 hearts and 19-20 points, inviting slam in hearts or NT if partner is maximum - not relevent here. Asking about aces and kings also does not get the job done.

This is hand 8 from the Murray League final as reported by Philip Wraight playing with Sally. Tim Harrison and Brian Smith were their team-mates.

The Bidding went:

I thought I was too strong for a Lucas 2♠ but did not like to open "rule of 20" 1♠ as I could not stand a red suit response. I mentally upgraded my intermediates and opened 1NT. Sally bid Stayman and raised to 3♠ over my 2♠ response. I found I had 7 losers so went on to 4♠ in spite of my 11 points. East lead ♥J and I won the second round. How do you plan the play (East has 3 spades)? Hint: You have lost ♥A and when you  play the two top trumps you discover there is a trump loser, so you have to play to avoid two club losers. The clubs, missing A and Q are a so called "broken suit" which you would prefer the opponents to open up. If you play the suit yourself, you have to guess who has ♣A and ♣Q and cannot succeed if East has both cards.

Please use the form below if you have any comments.

(Note that you can hover your mouse over each of the hands above to see details of points etc.)

This is a teams of 4 hand from Thursday 2nd March played by John Toothill and Jim Lawson.

The Bidding went:

The opening bid of 1♠ shows an admirable devotion to the adage "6-5, come alive".

John and Jim were the only pair to reach 5♣.

John played safely to make his contract. This gave them an excellent score of 12 IMPs when their team mates made 2♥ as North-South.
In fact, at one table, North-South were allowed to make 4♥, although it should go off on any lead from East.

The eagle-eyed will have noticed that East-West can actually make 6♣ as the cards lie, even on a heart lead.

Please use the form below if you have any comments.

This is a hand played at Burton as reported by Geoff Harrison playing with Joan Thomas.

The Bidding went:

North led ♦J. West discarded a club from dummy, won ♦A in hand, cleared the trumps, yielded one club.
Heart and Club winners and cross-ruffing secured the rest.

As East, I reasoned that with West’s overcall, game in spades was a certainty but that the void in my Diamonds, length in Clubs and the ♥A, the absence of points in West’s Spade suit meant points in Hearts and elsewhere. Thus that if she had one ace, then a small slam was on.
And so it proved. If there are no aces in West’s hand then 5♠ was a safe close out.

Nobody else found the slam, most were in game and made the same 12 tricks. Three pairs were slightly less successful!

Geoff Harrison

Editorial comments:
On this occasion the bidding has yielded a good result, but some points worth stressing:
1. How does East know that West doesn't have 2 small clubs. That would lead to 6♠ going down.
2. West's 1♠ overcall is not recommended. If North ends up as declarer, do you really want East to lead a spade?
3. North should double rather than bid 2♦. That way you will find a 4-4 heart fit.
4. If West passes rather than bidding 1♠, North bids 1♥, then East can bid 2NT to show at least 5-5 in the other two suits. West jumps to ♠4. East can then cue bid diamonds (denying a club control) and West can bid 6♠ with confidence.

Please use the form below if you have any comments.

Here's a fascinating hand from the SBU Peebles Autumn Congress, as reported by Babs Matthews.
It is Teams and North/South are vulnerable.

The bidding at our table went

At another table it went

At yet another it went

Which of the above auctions do you think you and your favourite partner would have followed?
Can you see the most improbable game that can be made by North/South? Click "Show Answer" and then see if you can make that game.

This was hand 7 played at Grange on Tuesday 16 August and reported by Jill Rushton. It is fairly routine but does illustrate an important principle of defence.
The contract was 1NT by East.
The lead was ♦4 at every table, which is obviously from a 4-card suit.
The contract was allowed to make at 4 tables (once with 1 overtrick and once with 2 overtricks), but it should be defeated.

North played A and declarer the 10. What should North return?

This hand illustrates the problem of responding in a competitive auction.
Sitting East I had a problem after Tim, sitting West, had opened 1♥ and North overcalled 2♣.  I had 5 spades but I didn't have the 10+ points necessary to bid the one round forcing 2♠ . Instead I made a negative double which only promised at least 4 spades. South now bids 3♣ and West has a real dilemma of how to show his strength and keep the options open for game in hearts, spades or NT.  West's 3♥ bid ended the auction missing the spade game.
Philip's answer to West's dilemma was a second negative double (technically known as a "responsive double"). This cannot be for penalties (with any suitable hand for a penalty double West would bid 3N).  It must show extra values, 5 hearts (East does not know you have more than 4), 3 spades (with 4 West bids 4♠) and denies two club stops so not suitable for 3N. East  would have bid 3♠ to show his fifth spade and deny three hearts allowing  the correct contract to be reached.
Richard Brazier
Feel free to add comments or questions about this Hand of the Week.

This deal illustrates the difficulty of bidding minor suit slams and was too difficult for Tuesday players, none of whom got beyond game, although all but one made 13 tricks.
At two tables I was watching the bidding went 1♣ - 3♣! - 5♣. East is, of course, much too strong for a limit bid but West could still have risked 4NT as it is unlikely partner has only one ace.
I have thought of six ways to get to 7♣, most of which also lead to 7NT.

This is the simplest bidding:

¹ Respsonder's jump shift showing 16+ points, good diamonds and (after subsequent club support) a slam try in opener's suit
² Three aces in Blackwood or Keycard Blackwood. With Roman Keycard Blackwood, the response to 4NT is 5♣.

Playing inverted minors and Roman Keycard Blackwood (neither available on Tuesdays) the bidding is nice and simple:

¹ Agreeing clubs and forcing
² If 5NT asks for specific kings, the 6♦ response enables West to count 13 tricks and bid 7NT. (Note that if East denies the ♦K then West can count 13 tricks in 7♣)
Philip Wraight

Feel free to add comments or questions about this Hand of the Week.

At our table there was the above unopposed auction to 3NT (no checkback by East). Our team mates bid better to 4♥ which is destined to go one off - they were the only pair in the room to bid and make the heart game.
On lead, Sally ruled out both majors. As the auction suggested a safe rather than attacking lead she settled on ♣J rather than ♦3. Any other lead makes it relatively easy for West to make the contract. I felt I could not spare any card but the 6. In spite of this "discouraging" signal, when West, not unreasonably, ducked she continued with ♣9 after overcoming her surprise at still being on lead. A low card again from dummy and I played the ♣10 in tempo, mainly because I was worried that West would duck again if I played ♣8 and Sally would be endplayed. However it had the additional advantage that when West won the ♣A he assumed Sally had ♣8. He not unreasonably played a heart to the ♥K, and discovered the bad break. He could still have recovered with a spade to the ♠10 but not totally unreasonably played ♠K which Sally took with the ♠A. It was not clear to Sally to return a spade now but she did well to avoid a diamond lead and played a safe heart. Declarer could now see the way to 8 tricks - a spade, four hearts (losing one)  two diamonds (losing one) and a club. Assuming North had ♣8 the 9th trick could be safely established in clubs  so declarer played ♣7. When Sally showed out, I had two club tricks and a diamond return led to one down.
Philip Wraight

Only one pair bid to the correct grand slam on board 22 from Thursday 17 March.
One pair got to the wrong grand slam (7♠) but made it on an unfortunate (i.e. poor) lead.

The bidding shown is one route to the top contract of 7♥ 

1. 2♦ is game forcing (playing Benji Acol). Open 2♣ if playing Acol.
2. 2♥ shows nothing positive to say. (2♦ if the opening bid was 2♣)
3. 2♠ shows a 5+ card suit
4. 3♣ is natural, waiting to hear more about partner’s hand
5. 3♥ is a second suit
6. 4♥ (pleased to have found a better spot)
7. 4NT Roman Key Card Blackwood
8. 5♦ - 1 key card (which has to be ♣A)
9. 7♥ (can count 13 tricks)

Instructive points:

Looking at the North hand it is tempting to assume that you will be playing in spades.
But remember that a 4-4 usually plays better, since the long suit can be used for discards or (as here) for setting up a suit for no losers. So it is usually correct to show 2 suits rather than just 1 - don’t put all your eggs in one basket.

It is rarely correct to use Blackwood when you have a void. North used it to find out if South had the ♣A (to be able to discard the losing diamond). If the answer was “no, I don’t have any aces” then North would have asked for specific kings. If South shows ♣K then North would sign off in 6♥. If South shows ♦K (or both kings) then North bids 7♥

Note that 7♥ is a very good contract. Trumps and spades need to break no worse than 4-1

In fact you can make 7♥ on some 5-0 breaks. If East holds the following hand, you still make 7♥ 

♠ 6
♥ 10 6 4 3 2
♦ 10 6 4 3
♣ K 9 8

Advanced points.

We use 5NT to ask for specific kings. Remember that there are only 3 kings to worry about, since the king of trumps is one of the 5 key cards. With one king, you bid that suit. With two kings, you bid the suit where you don’t have a king.

When North/South bid to the much poorer contract of 7♠, East made the unfortunate lead of a trump. Whilst it is usually safe against a grand slam, you should worry when it is a singleton, as it can easily pick up an important card. Here, any other lead is likely to defeat the slam.

Mike Rothwell