Chinese pre-classical

Cross-comparison

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

• [1] listed as 'Chinese Pre-Classical (pre-WWI, source: Mauger 1915)', matching the chart
• [2] the 1915 (Mauger) column differs from 1903 (Li) on two hallmarks: East pays and gets double is NO, and settlement between non-winners is YES. Similarity 6 to Li, 6 to Chinese Classical, 2 to HKOS

Reading it

The 1915 Mauger column differs from Li 1903 on exactly two hallmarks, and scores 6 against Chinese Classical and 2 against HKOS. Its position between Late Qing and Chinese Classical is supported by rule content, not just by date order.

Sources

1. Sloper, Tom. "FAQ 2b: Identifying a Mah-Jongg Variant." Sloperama. cross-check checked 2026-09-18

   Tile counts, hand sizes, flower handling and scoring for roughly 50 named variants. Primary source for most leaf nodes in this chart.

   https://www.sloperama.com/mjfaq/mjfaq02b.html

   Also cited on: Chinese archaic, Chinese classical, Shanghai / Hong Kong new style, Hong Kong old style, Modern HKOS, Taiwanese style and 43 more · bibliography #1

2. Sloper, Tom. "Comparative Analysis of Early Mah-Jongg Forms." Sloperama. canonical checked 2026-09-18

   Chinese Archaic, Late Qing and Pre-Classical rule comparisons.

   https://www.sloperama.com/mahjongg/analysis.html

   Also cited on: Chinese archaic, Late Qing style, Hong Kong old style, Japanese classical / arushiiaru · bibliography #4