History of Mahjong: Cheating

Japanese Reach Mahjong Rules. Strategy, news, sets - anything!

Moderator: Shirluban

HotelFSR
Expert Reacher
Expert Reacher
Posts: 328
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 am
Location: Federated States of Micronesia

Re:History of Mahjong: Cheating

Post by HotelFSR » Tue Jan 27, 2009 11:38 am

Yo\'re right about that.

Arcade: I would agree that the amount of luck required is not really reduced per se but the variance is lower which in itself is a good thing.

Actually, to pick the most variant thing it would probably be the dealer system. This adds a lot of variance with the reward/puishment depending on your starting tiles as dealer.

Removing that is one thing the WSoM rules got right, in my opinion.

Isn\'t that much more of an issue than Dora?

Benjamin
Senior Reacher
Senior Reacher
Posts: 157
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re:History of Mahjong: Cheating

Post by Benjamin » Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:12 pm

Wow. It\'s my opinion that those are two of the most strategically important aspects of the game, but it\'s pretty clear I shouldn\'t bother to explain why. Just please don\'t go on to criticize furiten and the payout system.:P

I guess all I can say at this point is that as a serious player experienced in two variants of Mahjong, I don\'t think these arguments are built on a solid understanding of how strategy works. If you really think that the dealer system and dora, not ura-dora or kan-dora but the dora tile itself, add variance without adding a significant amount of strategy, then please please find better people to play with!

HotelFSR
Expert Reacher
Expert Reacher
Posts: 328
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 am
Location: Federated States of Micronesia

Re:History of Mahjong: Cheating

Post by HotelFSR » Tue Jan 27, 2009 1:41 pm

I think the payout system and furiten are great things.

Certainly you are a far better player than I am, and you probably are right. I would very much like to hear more, though; it\'s a shame you think I\'m too stupid to understand. I have doctorate degrees in computer science and pure math. I\'m not someone whose way of thinking refuses to evolve.

I suppose at this point I must be closer to the WSoM school of thought, because it seems to align pretty well with the points I\'ve been bringing up. That\'s probably not a coincidence, although that ruleset I\'m sure has just as many issues.

I do wish WSoM had things like Reach and Furiten. I\'m sure most people here do too.

Let\'s resume this debate when I\'ve moved up the ranks a little :)

Benjamin
Senior Reacher
Senior Reacher
Posts: 157
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re:History of Mahjong: Cheating

Post by Benjamin » Tue Jan 27, 2009 1:55 pm

Aw geez, now I feel bad. I fully admit that I seem like the more unreasonable party in this discussion. Although I do think I\'m right. :P

I suppose if you\'re gracious enough to back down I ought to at least explain why I made the points above.

But I will make them in another post.

(Whoever thumbs-downed his karma, put it back up. Just because you don\'t agree with him doesn\'t mean he\'s being abusive. I\'ve certainly gotten much closer to anything ad-hominem than he has)

WorTeX
Senior Reacher
Senior Reacher
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 9:36 am
Location: Finland

Re:History of Mahjong: Cheating

Post by WorTeX » Thu Jan 29, 2009 7:38 am

Hmm, gave it some thought, and found a new aspect, the tsumo win actually is one base yaku for the hand, and it is taken away as a penalty if the tile is not self-drawn, because you rely on other players to throw the winning tile.

Your hand is concealed so you didn\'t rely them before, so if you do now, you get penalized for 1 yaku, taking the point from tsumo away.

HotelFSR
Expert Reacher
Expert Reacher
Posts: 328
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 am
Location: Federated States of Micronesia

Re:History of Mahjong: Cheating

Post by HotelFSR » Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:18 am

You\'re right about that, inasmuch as that\'s the logic behind it- as far as I can tell.

Doesn\'t negate the issues that have been brought up though.

I think it\'s better to be able to \'aim\' for a given hand score without a factor like this coming into the equation, just like the pros complaining about Ippatsu.

pringle
Fresh Reacher
Fresh Reacher
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 2:53 pm

Re:History of Mahjong: Cheating

Post by pringle » Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:30 am

No one could aim for ippatsu, unless they were cheating or have incredible skill to read other players hand and their throw.

Menzen can be aim for, using skill. You can\'t expect other to throw into your hand if your wait pretty obvious, especially when playing with high skill players, so you have to go for Menzen. But you can\'t expect to get Menzen if your wait more likely to be in someone hands, so you have to manage your hand to get higher chance, thus require some skill.

Surely luck may pay some role, but at what level of luck we talking about? Do people who get bonus from wind or dragon use only skill? Do people who get kokushi muso use no luck?

Apart from reading other players hand and the game flow, I don\'t see how mahjong require skill. Aren\'t Menzen is only one of a few thing in mahjong that still associate with skill?

WorTeX
Senior Reacher
Senior Reacher
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 9:36 am
Location: Finland

Re:History of Mahjong: Cheating

Post by WorTeX » Fri Jan 30, 2009 1:55 pm

Yeah, no one forces you to claim your winning tile from others, you could just sit and wait for tsumo.

HotelFSR
Expert Reacher
Expert Reacher
Posts: 328
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 am
Location: Federated States of Micronesia

Re:History of Mahjong: Cheating

Post by HotelFSR » Fri Jan 30, 2009 2:10 pm

In theory, yes.

But in reality you would almost never pass up a winner, especially when you have finalized your hand, so it\'s a bit of a moot point.

WorTeX
Senior Reacher
Senior Reacher
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 9:36 am
Location: Finland

Re:History of Mahjong: Cheating

Post by WorTeX » Fri Jan 30, 2009 2:31 pm

that means that in reality i could get statistics of every hand won by tsumo win if i wanted to, making it a non-random effect. case closed.

HotelFSR
Expert Reacher
Expert Reacher
Posts: 328
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 am
Location: Federated States of Micronesia

Re:History of Mahjong: Cheating

Post by HotelFSR » Fri Jan 30, 2009 2:44 pm

The case is not closed.

The problem has to do with the extra variance added and not the fact that you could wilfully pass up every opportunity to call Ron.

Additionally...

If this is a big deal to you, why also claim that you like WSoM rules, which have no Menzen bonus?

WorTeX
Senior Reacher
Senior Reacher
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 9:36 am
Location: Finland

Re:History of Mahjong: Cheating

Post by WorTeX » Fri Jan 30, 2009 4:44 pm

Because WSoM is WSoM, not riichi, if you happened to notice, there are lots of differences when comparing the two. Riichi is fine as it is, the tsumo also promotes closed hands which are the spice of the game. WSoM on the other hand doesn\'t give any reason to go for a closed hand since it doesn\'t give much of a bonus.

Not a big deal for me, but apparently for you, i\'m just saying what comes to mind, not relying on any facts.

Benjamin
Senior Reacher
Senior Reacher
Posts: 157
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 1:49 am
Location: Tokyo, Japan

Re:History of Mahjong: Cheating

Post by Benjamin » Fri Jan 30, 2009 5:18 pm

The big difference between tsumo and ippatsu is that you can plan for tsumo. Of course you can\'t guarantee that you\'ll draw the tile, but you can\'t really guarantee you\'ll win that hand anyways.

Unless you know what tiles are in your opponents\' hand, it\'s impossible to aim for ippatsu.
HotelFSR wrote:In theory, yes.

But in reality you would almost never pass up a winner, especially when you have finalized your hand, so it\'s a bit of a moot point.
You\'re right that this is rare, but may not be as rare as you think, particularly in the last round. If you\'re aiming to be in first or second, often you either have to win directly off a specific player, or self-draw. If another person\'s discard won\'t help your position, it would be strategically *incorrect* to win in that situation if accepting furiten and hoping to draw it yourself was an option.

HotelFSR
Expert Reacher
Expert Reacher
Posts: 328
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 am
Location: Federated States of Micronesia

Re:History of Mahjong: Cheating

Post by HotelFSR » Fri Jan 30, 2009 6:02 pm

True that.

In the last round you might want to win on self draw for strategic reasons, but that applies whether or not there is a Menzen bonus.

It\'s a seperate issue.

Also, yes, you can plan for tsumo to an extent- but i do still feel it adds too much variance without adding quite as much in strategy. as an example, you can also plan for ura-dora to a limited extent (keep hand closed and reach), but it was presumably taken out because of the unfavorable variance/strategy tradeoff. Same goes for the Kan dora; you can decide whether to risk declaring Kans or not, but that too was taken out.


Also, re WSoM comment:

there are already so many closed hand bonuses and benefits, such that removing Menzen would hardly cause players to go for closed hands any less. it also doesn\'t seem wrong, at least in my view, that a hand with nothing but doras should be unwinnable without reaching. doras simply have certain downsides as opposed to yaku.

pringle
Fresh Reacher
Fresh Reacher
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 2:53 pm

Re:History of Mahjong: Cheating

Post by pringle » Fri Jan 30, 2009 9:55 pm

I don\'t think Menzen can be compared to ura-dora and kan-dora. One han per tile is too hugh. And with two combine, a crappy hand can turn to be a yakuman.

If you think Menzen+Dora is too much, I think what should be taken off is the Dora not the Menzen. Image

Post Reply