The comparison & result
The archived study reported 100,000 hands on each sheet. The Classic comparison recorded win shares of 50.1% and 49.9%, with a net difference of about +0.02 points per hand. The Club comparison recorded 51.0% and 49.0%, with about +0.07 Club points per hand.
Those are different scoring units, so the Club result is not “three times better”. Under the tested Club options, declaring a concealed gong collects 5 points from each other player immediately. That payment matters, but the study’s point estimates alone do not establish a general advantage or remove the risks of a particular declaration.
At your table
- You hold the fourth copy of your own concealed pong — declaring it banks 15 across the table
- NOT when that tile is your last safe discard against a visible big hand — the collection is not worth dealing in
Check your table’s scoring rules before applying the finding. Read the Taiwanese Club reference.
How it was tested
Tested in the Hé Fēn Lab: 100,000 hands on the club sheet AND 100,000 on Classic, kong-declarers against never-kong players, seats swapped so the deal is fair. Reported net differences were about +0.07 Club points and +0.02 Classic points per hand. These are different scoring units and should not be compared as multiples of one another.
The players were software policies, not human participants. This report describes the published experiment; it does not establish the best move for every possible hand or opponent.
Results without a published uncertainty interval should be read as point estimates. Similar results do not prove two choices are equivalent.
Read the Lab’s method and limitationsPublished by Hé Fēn Mahjong. Ask about this finding or suggest a correction.