The comparison & result
This study compared players forbidden to call chows with players allowed to call them. It asked whether the loss of concealment outweighed the progress a call could make.
The archived report described close win rates and point averages, without an uncertainty interval. That leaves the overall comparison unresolved. For an individual hand, consider whether the chow shortens your route and whether it removes a scoring option you need.
At your table
Use the result to question a blanket habit. A particular hand can still favor a different decision because of its value, wait, available tiles or opponents.
Check your table’s scoring rules before applying the finding. Read the Taiwanese Classic reference.
How it was tested
Tested in the Hé Fēn Lab: 100,000 hands, half the seats forbidden to call chows, half calling freely. The reported results were close; without uncertainty estimates, that does not establish equivalence.
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.