Hong Kong old style

Assessment

Confidence

documented a published ruleset or rule description exists and is cited

Evidence

corroborated two or more independent sources agree on the facts that define this variant

Cross-comparison

What each source was read to say, set side by side. The numbers are the sources above.

• [1] few special hands; books: Perlmen & Chan, Constantino, Li, Lo, Tsui
• [2] minimum and maximum both 'varies'; branched off traditional mahjong after WWII, prevalent among the upper class of Shanghai and Peking
• [5] in the same table HKOS scores 0 similarity against 1920s standard Chinese Classical and 4 against the 1920s 'New Method', supporting the chart's decision to descend HKOS through an intermediate new-style node rather than directly from Chinese Classical
• [6] describes Hong Kong or Cantonese mahjong as differing from Chinese Classical in minor scoring details, and states it does not allow multiple players to win from a single discard, which is the opposite of the Taiwanese rule
• [4] HKOS (舊章, also 香港牌, 廣東牌, 清章麻雀) 'evolved very directly and naturally from classical mahjong' through two changes: abolishing fu, and replacing dealer-pays-double with discarder-pays-double. Kwan believes the second came first, 'already in the (late) classical environment'. Later steps: half-flush and all pungs raised to 2 fan (二二制), then 3 (三三制); the 勒 multiple-limit system (citing Perlmen & Chan pp. 69-70); a minimum that rose to today's 3 fan; and, under Japanese and Taiwanese influence, a 'discarder pays all' that is really 'half' because of the self-draw bonus. He gives no dates for these stages, and treats New Chapter (新章) as a later re-addition of hands to HKOS.
• [2] Re-read: the page now dates the adoption of 'Clear Chapter' or HKOS, with pungs unscored and fu removed, to the 1950s, when 'New Style' variants 'became associated with gambling in HK'. The 3-3 system (3-fan minimum; all pungs and half-flush 3 fan) is dated to the 1970s and New Chapter to the early 1980s. Minimum '0-2, 3 with Flowers'. Modern play drops the dead wall and uses discarder pays all.
• [7] Re-read: now dates Clear Chapter / HKOS to the 1950s, when public mahjong parlours opened in Hong Kong and 'New Style' was 'deemed as too slow paced'. Its evolution chart reads 1900s Chinese Classical, 1920s Shanghai New Style, 1950s HKOS, 1970s New Chapter, 1980s Guangdong, 2000s Hong Kong Taiwanese; its text puts New Chapter in the early 1980s.
• [8] Depaulis and Tsui have three HKOS columns: '1950 Nguyen (HKOS)' from Nguyên Xuân Mai's guide (Haiphong, 1950), Perlmen & Chan 1979 (Hong Kong) and Amy Lo 2001 (Canton). All three: no points-then-doubling, no bonus for the win, concealed sets not rewarded, payoff set before play, no settlement between non-winners. Dealer paid double in Nguyen and Perlmen & Chan, not in Lo. The 1950 column is the earliest dated fan-only ruleset in the chart.
• [9] Hong Kong mahjong is 清章 (Clear Chapter), evolved from 老章. The older standard was 雞四 (chicken hand allowed, four-tai limit), no flowers and the 二二制 (half-flush and all pungs 2, pure one suit 4 or 5), later the 三三制 (3, 3 and 7) with a three-tai minimum.

Reading it

Tiles, hand, scoring and payout agree across the sources: 136 tiles with flowers optional, 13 in hand, fan only with fu abolished, and only the winner paid. The date conflict that made this node 'conflicting' is gone at its source. Re-read on 2026-09-25, the Mahjong Wiki's HKOS and Guangdong pages both date the Clear Chapter simplification to the 1950s and give the 1970s to the later 3-3 system, which the chart's '1950s, fu removed' now matches. The earliest dated fan-only ruleset is Nguyên Xuân Mai's (Haiphong, 1950), as charted by Depaulis and Tsui. The descent is disputed. Kwan derives HKOS directly from the late classical game, with New Chapter added afterwards, and has no pattern-heavy stage before it. The chart and the Mahjong Wiki put a new-style stage between. What the 1920s texts do show is Kwan's payout step: Babcock's New Method and Tchou's nouveau mode are his 出銃么二制, and Sloper's early-forms table scores HKOS at 4 against the 1920s New Method and 0 against 1920s Chinese Classical. The node's detail is otherwise sound. The later stages (二二制, 三三制, the rising minimum, discarder pays all) belong to its descendants and are recorded here only for context.