ANALYSIS OF EARLY MAHJONG RULES
1903
(Li)		 1915 (Mauger) 1920s standard (CC) 1920s "New Method" Japanese Classical HKOS
1 Score 10 or 20 for MJ, plus pts for sets YES YES YES YES YES NO Hallmark of CC
2 Count points, then double YES YES YES YES YES NO
3 Concealed sets rewarded more highly YES YES YES YES YES NO
4 Discarder penalty (pays for all) NO NO NO YES YES YES
5 Self-pick rewarded NO NO NO YES YES YES
6 Special hands FEW? FEW MANY MANY MANY FEW
7 East pays/gets double YES NO YES NO NO NO
8 Settlement between non-winners NO YES YES NO NO NO Hallmark of CC
Tabulated Results:
Similarity score as to Li 8 6 6 4 4 2
Similarity score as to Mauger 6 8 6 4 4 2
Similarity score as to CC 6 6 8 4 4 0
Similarity score as to 1920s New Meth. 4 4 4 8 8 4
Similarity score as to Japanese Class. 4 4 4 8 8 4
Similarity score as to HKOS 2 2 0 4 4 8
Conclusions:
Games described by Li and Mauger are largely similar to CC
Possible that some development occurred in parallel with the popularity of CC
1920s New Method, Japanese Classical similar to one another (essentially same game)
1920s New Method, Japanese Classical a "balanced mix" between CC and HKOS
Notes:
Data based on Thierry Depaulis' newsgroup post of Dec. 11 2006 6:50 AM
Chart subject to change; comments, feedback welcome
Comment "Hallmark of CC" is mine, not Thierry's
Additional data posted by Thierry on 1/2, 1/7, and 1/8/2007

A newer more comprehensive analysis can be found at http://www.imahjong.com/maiarchives205d_3.html.