Very nice :) I will attempt a question for a poll. :)Of one standard rule versus multiple variants.
Define: Having one single standard rule for riichi tournaments would more easily bring players to convert/learn riichi.
Measure: Before Chinese Official rule comes to Europe, there were no real structures to federate mahjong in Europe (AFAIK).
Basing on this standard rule, European players build up organizations, European-level organizations, and set up regular tournaments.
Analysis: This could have be made before CO rules, and without CO rules. But it seems europ\'players don\'t want to have to adapt to a close-but-not-same rule to meet other players.
Improve: Methinks Riichi is a better rule than CO.
Control: It\'s only the begging of european-wide-riichi, so I can\'t control yet.
Of the closed tanyao versus open tanyao.
Define: Letting some players over-use open tanyao can screw off game play and bore players. So forbid open tanyao will give a sweeter game and bring more people to riichi.
Measure: Before EMA riichi rule they were x riichi players in Europe. Now, they are y.
(If you count registered players, who go to championships, x = 0 and y can be count from EMA and national federations players list. If you count all players, including the unknown ones who didn\'t contact federations, x and y are unknown and can\'t be evaluate.)
Analysis: Compare x and y versus x and y\', where y\' is the number of players who would be playing riichi in Europe if EMA rule have allowed open tanyao.
Improve & Control: Error: y\' is used without being initialized. The value of y\' can not be evaluate.
Ah come on, this is fun :woohoo:I think we\'re starting to get overly technical here
Interesting. Very well Benjamin, I drop the subject with the questions below. Even because I just found out I can\'t do a poll on the forum, so the survey option above is academic. I would like to do something like that nevertheless. So I will post questions, my choice and then whoever wishes to continue, just adds to the values:To attempt to wrap it up, I\'d say that most (but definitely not all) experienced players think that open tanyao adds to the game. I think we all also agree that it gives beginners, which EMA is full of, an easy way to throw off the game. Whether or not that makes it worth banning is more a question of *event organization* than rules or strategy.
(And believe me, I don\'t really like saying this all that much. EMA folks can tell you that from the very beginning, before there was even a Riichi championship, I railed and railed against closed tanyao since the average age of the Japanese player who prefers it is probably over 60.)
Since most of us here are not *organizers* but players, I don\'t think we\'re going to get much deeper into the topic than we have already so maybe we can move on to something else. I suggest the uma; it\'s way too small and the only reason it isn\'t a more normal amount (like +5000, +15000) is because of fears that it would hurt players\' feelings. (Really!).
1-crak
Do you believe a closed Tanyao helps the european players achieve a better standard set of rules?
YES = 0 /// NO = 0 /// NOT SURE = 1
2-crak
Do you believe a closed Tanyao helps the european organizations get more players into the game?
YES = 0 /// NO = 0 /// NOT SURE = 1
3-crak
Do you believe a closed Tanyao helps the european riichi scene by making the game more interesting?
YES = 1 /// NO = 0 /// NOT SURE = 0
4-crak
Would you play a closed Tanyao game / tournament?
YES = 1 /// NO = 0 /// NOT SURE = 0