HKOS scoring for Little Four Winds
J. R. Fitch
Perlman & Chan, if I'm reading correctly, state
that Little Four Winds should be paid Maximum
Hand, the same as for Big Four Winds.
This seems too great a prize. In fact, my contacts
in Hong Kong say that it deserves only 4 fan. Of
course, being semi-pure it will get another 3 fan.
That is 2 laak already. If the remaining is a
Pong, then the hand is also All Pong and therefore
gets 3 more fan, minimum total of 10 fan, therefor
3 laak (which is generally Maximum Hand).
Could it be that P&C were generalizing, or forgot
that the remaining set might only be a Chow?
--
J. R. Fitch
Nine Dragons Software
351 Ulloa Street
San Francisco,
California 94127
415.664.3474 v.
415.564.3161 f.
http://www.ninedragons.com
jrf...@ninedragons.com
Alan Kwan
<jrf...@ninedragons.com> wrote:
>To All With An Interest in HKOS,
>
>Perlman & Chan, if I'm reading correctly, state
>that Little Four Winds should be paid Maximum
>Hand, the same as for Big Four Winds.
>
>This seems too great a prize.
This is not. Little Four Winds is commonly a Maximum Hand in HKOS.
For example, P. 133 of Mr. Gaan's book includes it as one of the
"standard" Maximum Hands.
> In fact, my contacts
>in Hong Kong say that it deserves only 4 fan. Of
>course, being semi-pure it will get another 3 fan.
>That is 2 laak already. If the remaining is a
>Pong, then the hand is also All Pong and therefore
>gets 3 more fan, minimum total of 10 fan, therefor
>3 laak (which is generally Maximum Hand).
>
>Could it be that P&C were generalizing, or forgot
>that the remaining set might only be a Chow?
Don't forget that you are also allowed a chow in Big Three Dragons.
In fact, Little Four Winds is significantly more difficult than Big
Three Dragons. The 'combinatoric ratio' is 31 to 4. (Computations
omitted.) If any hand deserves not to be a Maximum Hand, I'll pick
Big Three Dragons followed by Four Concealed Triplets.
"Live life with Heart." - Alan Kwan / ta...@notmenetvigator.com
http://home.netvigator.com/~tarot (hard-core game reviews)
DS Editor - http://www.dimension-s.com
(please remove anti-spam section "notme" from mailing address)
J. R. Fitch
> If any hand deserves not to be a Maximum Hand, I'll pick
> Big Three Dragons...
Thank you for your response (wherein you indicate
that Little Four Winds is fully deserving of
Maximujm Hand). In my program HKMJ, I do not give
Maximum Hand for Big Three Dragons, despite
Perlman & Chan. As per my instruction from HK
locals, I give it 6 fan. Other fans (All Pong,
etc.) may take the hand to 2 laak or to 3 laak.
Do you agree that this is appropriate given the
odds?
--
J. R. Fitch
Nine Dragons Software
351 Ulloa Street
San Francisco,
California 94127
415.664.3474 v.
415.564.3161 f.
http://www.ninedragons.com
jrf...@ninedragons.com
cofa...@my-dejanews.com
"J. R. Fitch" <jrf...@ninedragons.com> wrote:
> Alan said:
>
> > If any hand deserves not to be a Maximum Hand, I'll pick
> > Big Three Dragons...
>
> Thank you for your response (wherein you indicate
> that Little Four Winds is fully deserving of
> Maximujm Hand). In my program HKMJ, I do not give
> Maximum Hand for Big Three Dragons, despite
> Perlman & Chan. As per my instruction from HK
> locals, I give it 6 fan. Other fans (All Pong,
> etc.) may take the hand to 2 laak or to 3 laak.
>
> Do you agree that this is appropriate given the
> odds?
Trying to avoid the confusions that could always be created from the
term "Hand" in the score evaluation of a winning hand, IMJ uses the term
"Awarded Format" for each element which deserves a score in a winning
hand. (I have used "Score Element" in a review of the China's official
mahjong rules. I think the meaning of "Score Element" is more clear for
this purpose.)
In IMJ Rules, "Little Four Winds" (Soft Poles, Art. 26.8) is awarded 6
Folds and "Big Three Dragons" (Great Youths, Art. 26.7) 6 Folds as well.
Also, from my research with long-time players who play HKOS and only, I
could not see "Little Four Winds" being "commonly" recognized as maximum
hand at all, although the term "maximum hand" is arguable whether it
should be used in HKOS.
As to "Big Three Dragons", whether it is admitted as a "maximum hand"
depends greatly on what the "Agreed Highest Rank" (Art. 7.3, IMJ Rules)
is. If we accept up to 10 Folds or more, which is fairly common among
players at certain level of skills or stake if gambling is the purpose
of play, both "Little Four Winds" and "Big Three Dragons" are too far
from the "maximum hand" (IF they are counted as an ELEMENT in the
hand.).
Of course, either "Little Four Winds" or "Big Three Dragons" (as
individual ELEMENT) does not normally come alone. When you add up the
possibilities of "all pongs", "semi-pure", etc., the /HAND/ could easily
reach its MAXIMUM HAND (i.e., the Agreed Highest Rank as in IMJ).
Perhaps this is a reason why some authors consider "Little Four Winds"
or "Big Three Dragons" as "Maximum Hand".
--
COFA TSUI
IMJ Rules, the world's 1st full version mahjong rules
http://www.cofatsui.com/mahjong.html
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
Alan Kwan
Patterns' (we love termonology variations, don't we ^_^ ) is
historical. In Chinese Classical (with its low pattern faan values
and low maximum limit), Big 3 Dragons is a Limit Pattern, and Little 4
Winds too when it is recognized. Since HKOS began merely as a
simplification of Classical, the Classical Limit Patterns were
inhereited as HKOS Limit Patterns.
Later development, with higher and higher pattern faan values which
brings about the complex "laak" limit system which in turn brings
about higher and higher maximum limits, has brought about variations.
It's not unfair to say that there are so many variations of HKOS now
that a "standard" no longer exists ...
I don't think maximum limits of over 3 laak are common. "Pure One
Suit" is worth 2 laak, and traditional "Limit Patterns" are valued at
3 laak. Most players feel that Big Three Dragons and Little Four
Winds should be worth more than Pure One Suit, so they are awarded 3
laak, the limit.
I guess many players would feel that hands of more than 3 laak are too
rare to justify the complication of differentiating the pattern faan
values for the rare patterns. IMO, if one is looking for anything
other than simplicity, one really shouldn't be playing HKOS.
Certain groups may be playing their own set of house rules, but the
most common rules are the simpliest ones.
>Of course, either "Little Four Winds" or "Big Three Dragons" (as
>individual ELEMENT) does not normally come alone. When you add up the
>possibilities of "all pongs", "semi-pure", etc., the /HAND/ could easily
>reach its MAXIMUM HAND (i.e., the Agreed Highest Rank as in IMJ).
>
>Perhaps this is a reason why some authors consider "Little Four Winds"
>or "Big Three Dragons" as "Maximum Hand".
"Live life with Heart." - Alan Kwan / ta...@notmenetvigator.com
cofa...@my-dejanews.com
ta...@notmenetvigator.com (Alan Kwan) wrote:
> The reason that Big 3 Dragons (and also Little 4 Winds) are 'Limit
> Patterns' (we love termonology variations, don't we ^_^ )
(Yes, who cares about the "standard" or "unified" terms anyway. ~_^ )
is
> historical. In Chinese Classical (with its low pattern faan values
> and low maximum limit), Big 3 Dragons is a Limit Pattern, and Little 4
> Winds too when it is recognized. Since HKOS began merely as a
> simplification of Classical, the Classical Limit Patterns were
> inhereited as HKOS Limit Patterns.
>
> Later development, with higher and higher pattern faan values which
> brings about the complex "laak" limit system which in turn brings
> about higher and higher maximum limits, has brought about variations.
>
Hmmm... Perhaps this may clear my doubt "whether the term 'Maximum Hand'
even exists in HKOS."