Mahjong CompendiumShanghai / Hong Kong new style

Proto-mahjong › Chinese classical › Shanghai / Hong Kong new style

Shanghai / Hong Kong new style

1920s

Sources

Sources

The documents this entry rests on, as published. Each can be opened and checked; nothing in this part is anybody’s reading of them.

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

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

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

    for this variant The only guide outside the Mahjong Wiki that sets a many-hand Hong Kong New Style against a few-hand Old Style. It is undated and unsourced

    Also cited on: Chinese archaic, Late Qing style, Chinese pre-classical, Chinese classical, Hong Kong old style, Modern HKOS and 45 more · bibliography #1

  2. Encyclopedia Mahjong Wiki. "Chinese Classical Overview." mahjong.wikidot.com. cross-check checked 2026-09-25

    http://mahjong.wikidot.com/rules:chinese-classical-overview

    chart’s note Cited as the source for individual nodes in the chart's node table. Carries no bibliography or per-claim citations of its own; see the appendix on tracing the wiki.

    for this variant Same wiki as the canonical source. Its New Style payout values cite no source

    Also cited on: Chinese classical · bibliography #39

  3. Historical Babcock, Joseph Park. "The Chinese Game 麻雀." Chapter VIII of Babcock's Rules for Mah-Jongg: The Red Book of Rules, second edition, Shanghai and San Francisco, 1923, pp. 63-82; transcribed on Wikisource. cross-check checked 2026-09-25

    https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Babcock%27s_Rules_for_Mah-Jongg/Chapter_8

    AI summary Babcock's account of how the Chinese game differed from his own Mah-Jongg: four rounds with seats drawn by wind discs, the round wind doubling, a 14-tile dead wall, 2 points for a pair, edge or middle wait, one-suit doubling for the winner only, limit hands, the Chinese insurance penalties, a 300-point limit, and the 'New Method' in which the discarder pays double and East no longer pays or receives double.

    for this variant Independent 1923 evidence of the new-method payout, and the earliest contemporary support for punishing the discarder

    Also cited on: Chinese classical · bibliography #124

  4. Historical Tchou Kia-kien [Zhu Jiajian]. Le mah-jong tel qu'il est joué par les Chinois. Paris: Les Éditions du Monde Moderne, 1924. Text edition by Pierre Palpant, Bibliothèque Chine ancienne, 2012. cross-check checked 2026-09-25

    https://www.chineancienne.fr/d%C3%A9but-20e-s/tchou-kia-kien-le-mah-jong/

    AI summary A Chinese author's full rulebook for the game 'as the Chinese play it': 136 tiles, flowers optional and disliked by 'true amateurs', walls of 17 stacks, points then fan doublings, settlement among the losers, the 'old mode' with East paying and receiving double, and the 'new mode', which 'all Chinese players have adopted', in which the discarder pays double.

    for this variant Independent 1924 confirmation that Chinese players had adopted the new payout

    Also cited on: Chinese classical · bibliography #125

  5. Historical 上海遊藝社 (Shanghai Youyi She), ed. 《繪圖麻雀牌譜》 [Illustrated Manual of Mahjong]. Shanghai: 上海遊藝社, 1924 (民國13年), 60 pp. National Library of China scan, on Wikimedia Commons. cross-check checked 2026-09-25

    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NLC416-09jh003414-41132_%E7%B9%AA%E5%9C%96%E9%BA%BB%E9%9B%80%E7%89%8C%E8%AD%9C.pdf

    AI summary The 1924 Shanghai edition of the first Chinese mahjong manual (Shen Yifan's, 1914): 136 tiles with no flowers, 17-stack walls, 副 (points) and 倍 (doublings), 10 副 for going out, ten 賀例 special hands including 國士無雙 and 九連寶燈, the 滿門 limit of about 300 副, liability rules, a 14-tile 王張 dead wall, and a note on the 'recent new method' of double payment for a self-drawn win. Read from the page images of the scan.

    for this variant The only 1920s Shanghai text in Chinese read so far. It names a new payout method (近時新法), not a new style of hands

    Also cited on: Chinese classical · bibliography #126

  6. Encyclopedia Wikipedia. "Hong Kong Mahjong Scoring Rules." cross-check checked 2026-09-25

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_mahjong_scoring_rules

    chart’s note Faan scoring, the common 3-faan minimum and the 13-faan ceiling.

    for this variant Uses 'Hong Kong New Style' for today's faan game, the reverse of the wiki's usage. It shows the naming conflict but is no evidence on the 1920s

    Also cited on: Hong Kong old style, Modern HKOS · bibliography #18

  7. Encyclopedia Mahjong Wiki. "Hong Kong New Style Overview." mahjong.wikidot.com. canonical checked 2026-09-25

    http://mahjong.wikidot.com/rules:hong-kong-new-style-overview

    chart’s note Cited as the source for individual nodes in the chart's node table. Carries no bibliography or per-claim citations of its own; see the appendix on tracing the wiki.

    Only cited here · bibliography #40

  8. Rulebook "Let's Mahjong!" ruleset, as tabulated on the Mahjong Wiki HKOS scoring page. supporting checked 2026-09-18

    http://mahjong.wikidot.com/rules:hong-kong-old-style-scoring

    chart’s note Cited as a second fan-list column and treated as the representative New Chapter standard. The wiki describes it as the transition from HKOS to Guangdong Style. It is a ruleset, not a scholarly source, and the wiki gives no publication details for it.

    for this variant Chart reference 28. It bears on New Chapter, the later style, more than on this node

    Also cited on: Hong Kong old style, Guangdong style · bibliography #28

  9. Historical Wei, Wing Lock. The Theory of Mah Jong: Its Principles, Psychology, Tactics, Strategies, and Fine Points, including the Complete Chinese Rules of Play. Boston: Small, Maynard, 1925. Scanned at the Internet Archive. cross-check checked 2026-10-11

    https://archive.org/details/theoryofmahjongi00weiw

    AI summary A Chinese author's 'complete Chinese rules': East always wins or loses twice the score, the losers settle the differences between their scores, a limit of 300 to 600, and liability penalties that make a discarder pay all losses for feeding a one-suit hand after nine tiles of that suit are exposed, or a terminals, winds or dragons hand.

    for this variant Independent 1920s evidence of the scoring inflation the Mahjong Wiki takes for the start of New Style and Kwan calls late classical. The growth is in doubles and limits within classic scoring, not a large set of new patterns. Wei does not name Shanghai

    Also cited on: Chinese classical · bibliography #130

  10. Journalism "Mah-Jongg Notes: Need for a Hongkong League." The China Mail (Hong Kong), 28 February 1924. Scanned at the Internet Archive. cross-check checked 2026-10-11

    https://archive.org/details/NPCM19240228

    AI summary A weekly rules column in a Hong Kong English-language daily during the 1924 craze. It answers readers' questions on scoring, 'faan' and liability, and reports a move to found a Hong Kong Mah-Jongg League with a set of basic rules.

    for this variant Shows the Cantonese 'faan' and discarder liability in use in Hong Kong by 1924. It describes the expatriate game and says nothing of a new style

    Only cited here · bibliography #495

  11. Encyclopedia Mahjong Wiki. "Guangdong MCR Overview." mahjong.wikidot.com. cross-check checked 2026-09-19

    http://mahjong.wikidot.com/rules:gmcr-overview

    chart’s note Cited as the source for individual nodes in the chart's node table. Carries no bibliography or per-claim citations of its own; see the appendix on tracing the wiki.

    for this variant Same wiki and editor as the canonical source, so it repeats the HKNS-before-HKOS chronology rather than corroborating it

    Also cited on: Guangdong MCR / GMCR, MCR / Chinese official · bibliography #43

  12. Encyclopedia Mahjong Wiki. "Chinese Classical Scoring." mahjong.wikidot.com. cross-check checked 2026-09-25

    http://mahjong.wikidot.com/rules:chinese-classical-scoring

    AI summary Doubles and mini-point tables for 'Early Classical (1900s)', 'Late Classical (1910s)', Shanghai New Style and Hong Kong New Style, with the Classical payout in which all players pay and receive. No sources are cited for the period columns.

    for this variant Same wiki as the canonical source. Its SHNS (1920s) and HKNS (1950s) columns cite no source

    Also cited on: Chinese classical · bibliography #127

  13. Historical Tow, Julius Su (J. S. Tow). The Outline of Mah Jong: How to Play and How to Win, the Real Chinese Methods. New York: Pacific Printing Co., 1924. Scanned at the Internet Archive. cross-check checked 2026-09-25

    https://archive.org/details/outlineofmahjong00towj

    AI summary A Chinese author's account of the classical game (the Leader pays and receives double, the losers settle among themselves, a limit of 300 to 600), with footnotes and an appendix of regional variations: Shanghai and Ningbo single-tier walls of 21 with 13 counted out to each player, a base of 10 'quite common in Shanghai' against the usual 20, all-pung hands worth only 10 extra in Shanghai instead of a double, and a 16-tile game in Fukien.

    for this variant Shows Shanghai practice diverging from Cantonese in 1924 in walls, base score and the value of all-pung hands, not in a large set of new hands

    Also cited on: Chinese classical, Taiwanese style · bibliography #129

  14. Scholarship Depaulis, Thierry and Cofa Tsui. "Evolution of Various Forms of Mahjong (1890-2001)." International Mahjong InfoWeb, archive 205d(3), 2007, updated 2008. cross-check checked 2026-09-25

    https://www.imahjong.com/maiarchives205d_3.html

    AI summary Feature-by-feature chart of the Chinese forms of the game from Wilkinson 1890 to Amy Lo 2001, taking the Late Qing novels as the reference gameplay. Its 1890 column is sourced to Wilkinson's 1925 memorandum.

    for this variant Independent scholarship. It dates its Shanghai New Style column to 1950-60 in Hong Kong from Perlmen and Chan (1979) and Lo (2001), against the chart's 1920s

    Also cited on: Chinese archaic, Late Qing style, Chinese pre-classical, Chinese classical, Hong Kong old style · bibliography #109

  15. Encyclopedia Chinese Wikipedia: 香港麻將 (Hong Kong mahjong), traditional-script edition. cross-check checked 2026-09-25

    https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/%E9%A6%99%E6%B8%AF%E9%BA%BB%E9%9B%80

    AI summary Traces modern Hong Kong and Guangdong mahjong to the 清章 (Clear Chapter) way of play evolved out of 老章 (Old Chapter), with 新章 (New Chapter) formed by adding hands such as 六獨, 十八番 and 無奇不有; and the older Hong Kong practice of 雞四 (no minimum, four-fan limit), no flowers and the 二二制 before today's 三三制 and three-fan minimum.

    for this variant Independent of the chart. Its 老章, 清章, 新章 sequence puts 新章 after HKOS

    Also cited on: Hong Kong old style, Modern HKOS · bibliography #131

  16. Guide Sloper, Tom. "FAQ 11: History of Mah-Jongg." Sloperama. supporting checked 2026-09-25

    https://www.sloperama.com/mjfaq/mjfaq11f.html

    chart’s note Regional branching in the 1930s and 40s; Racster 1924 on Shanghai versus Hong Kong base scores; the author's own note that the tree illustration predates later findings.

    for this variant Chart reference 3. It dates China's regional variants to the 1930s and 1940s, so it supports the node's 1920s only loosely

    Also cited on: Proto-mahjong, Chinese classical · bibliography #3

  17. Scholarship Kwan, Alan Shiu Ho (關兆豪). 《中庸麻雀史觀》 (Zung Jung: a Perspective of Mahjong History). Online book, 2009, zj-mahjong.info. cross-check checked 2026-09-25

    http://www.zj-mahjong.info/book_hk/Table%20of%20Contents.html

    AI summary A history of scoring by the author of Zung Jung. Early classical rules after Hatsuhara Shigeki's 1952 reconstruction; the late classical 'inflation' of hands and base score; Hong Kong Old Style (舊章) derived directly from the late classical game by abolishing fu and adopting discarder-pays-double (出銃么二制); the 二二制 and 三三制, the 勒 multiple-limit system and the rising minimum; and New Chapter (新章) as a later re-addition of hands. Gives no dates for the Hong Kong stages.

    for this variant Independent scholarship and the fullest Chinese-language account. It rejects a pattern-heavy stage before HKOS and gives the name 新章 to the later style

    Also cited on: Chinese classical, Hong Kong old style, Modern HKOS, Guangdong style, Zung Jung · bibliography #132

  18. Encyclopedia Mahjong Wiki. "Family Tree and Timeline." mahjong.wikidot.com. supporting checked 2026-10-11

    http://mahjong.wikidot.com/

    chart’s note The decade-by-decade timeline and the branch structure this chart follows, including the caveat that each variant's evolution has been cross-cultural.

    for this variant Chart reference 7 and the source of the node's name and date. It shares a wiki and editor with the canonical source, so it is not independent, and it cites nothing

    Also cited on: Chinese classical, Hong Kong Taiwanese, Nanyang variants, Mainland regionals, Korean traditional, Western / British Empire style · bibliography #7

  19. Encyclopedia Chinese Wikipedia: 麻将. cross-check checked 2026-10-11

    https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-hans/%E9%BA%BB%E5%B0%86

    AI summary The origin section weighs the Ningbo and Fujian-Guangdong theories and traces each origin legend (Powell 1923, the Taiping hypothesis, the Tianyi Pavilion Chen Yumen account, the 2008 CCTV Harvey diary) to where it first appears.

    for this variant Independent of the chart on naming. It places 新章 after 清章, against any 1920s Shanghai 新章

    Also cited on: Proto-mahjong, Chinese classical, Nanyang variants, Singapore style, Filipino style, Vietnamese classical and 1 more · bibliography #105

AI-generated

Analysis

Written by an AI model from the sources above. It is a reading of them, not a source in its own right: every figure in it points back to a numbered source, and where the two disagree, the source is right.

Assessment

Confidence
documented a published ruleset or rule description exists and is cited
Evidence
partial sources agree on some points but disagree or say nothing on others

Cross-comparison

What each source was read to say, set side by side. The numbers are the sources above.

SourceTilesHandFlowersScoringPayout
[1]136 or 14413, out on 14optional; melded instantly when receivedcount doubles, convert to pointswinner only
[2]———exponential; minimum variesdiscarder pays all; self-draw paid x2 by each loser; discard paid x4 by the discarder, x0 by the others; dealer paid and paying double
[3]————discarder pays double; self-draw paid double by each; East not doubled; no double between losers
[4]————discarder pays at the higher rate, others at the lower; self-draw paid at the higher rate by all
[5]————self-draw paid double by each player
[6]———faan, usually a 3-faan minimum and a 13-faan limit, converted exponentially ('full spicy' or 'half spicy')discarder pays all, or discarder pays half with the other two splitting the rest; self-pick paid by all
[7]———classic scoring for both stages: the timeline gives Shanghai New Style 'New Style Patterns; Classic Scoring' and Hong Kong New Style 'Classic Scoring+'—
[8]—Seven Pairs, the Jewel Dragons and Four Concealed Pungs named as hands long used or commonplace in 'New Style' rulesets———
[9]———the liberal school gives one extra double where the strict school gives ten points (winning on the roof, on the last tile, robbing a kong, no straights); its limit is 500 points against the strict school's 300; experts use a base score of 50 to 100 instead of 10 or 20—
[10]———an extra 'faan' for the minor Three Scholars handa player who discards the dragon that gives an opponent his third dragon set pays for himself and the other two losers; otherwise each loser pays for himself
  • [1] Sloperama's 'Hong Kong New Style': many many special hands, vs few in Old Style
  • [8] wiki treats New Chapter as the transition from HKOS toward Guangdong style
  • [11] CORROBORATES THE INTERMEDIATE NODE: states that HKOS was adopted as a backlash to HKNS, which had itself evolved from Chinese Classical, and that the simplified variant born from that backlash is Qing Zhang, Clear Chapter, known in English as Hong Kong Old Style. That places a new-style stage between Chinese Classical and HKOS, which is exactly what this node is
  • [7] 'New Style' means a variant with a large number of winning conditions not found in Chinese Classical, some over 100. A first wave of two styles evolved from the classical game: Shanghai New Style, 'developed from the 1920s through the 1940s', and Hong Kong New Style, 'from the 1950s through the 1970s'. HKOS was born 'as a backlash' to it. The page's timeline gives Shanghai New Style '"New Style" Patterns; Classic Scoring' (1920s) and Hong Kong New Style 'Even more "New Style" Patterns; Classic Scoring+' (early 50s). It warns that the Cantonese rulesets contemporary with HKOS, often called HKNS, are properly 'New Chapter'.
  • [2] The Chinese Classical overview's rules box, which covers 'Chinese Classical, SHNS, and HKNS' with separate New Style values for the payout.
  • [12] Carries 'Shanghai New Style (1920s)' and 'Hong Kong New Style (1950s)' columns beside the classical ones, and says both 'also reward wins by self-draw and punish discarders when there's a win by discard', with all players still paying and receiving.
  • [3] The 'New Method', 'fast finding favor in certain Chinese communities' and 'favored by more advanced players' in 1923. Under it, a player is not liable for the insurance penalty if he holds any waiting hand.
  • [4] The 'nouveau mode' of 1924, which 'all Chinese players have adopted' because 'a clumsy or careless player must pay double'.
  • [5] The 1924 Shanghai manual's note on the '近時新法' (recent new method). The same manual records a 'recent Shanghai practice' (近時滬地) of counting out 13 tiles each and building the rest flat, 21 to a side.
  • [13] In 1924 the Shanghai game already differed from the Cantonese: seats and the Leader decided by one throw; 'in Shanghai and Ningpo' a single-tier wall of 21 tiles with 13 counted out to each player (matching the Shanghai manual); a base of 10 'quite common in Shanghai' against the usual 20; and all-pung hands and the all-pungs double worth only 10 extra 'in Shanghai'.
  • [14] Depaulis and Tsui's 'Shanghai New Style' column (1950-60; 'as in Perlmen & Chan 1979 and Lo 2001'), region Hong Kong: not points-then-doubling, no bonus for the win, concealed sets not rewarded, payoff set before play, no settlement between non-winners, dealer not doubled. Their separate '1920s New Method' column comes from Babcock 1923 and Tchou 1924.
  • [6] Uses 'Hong Kong New Style' for today's standard Hong Kong game, and 'Hong Kong Old Style' for the archaic scoring, which is the opposite of the Mahjong Wiki's chronology. Its liability penalties under discarder-pays-half (九張包, 十二張包自摸, 五子包生) continue the nine-tile liability rule of the 1920s texts.
  • [15] Chinese-language sequence: 老章 (Old Chapter) → 清章 (Clear Chapter, the base of Hong Kong and Guangdong mahjong) → 新章 (New Chapter, adding 六獨, 十八台, 無奇不有). Older Hong Kong play was 雞四 (no minimum, a four-tai limit), without flowers and under the 二二制, before today's 三三制 and three-tai minimum.
  • [16] By 1920 'only minor rule differences existed throughout China', mainly between Shanghai and Canton in fine points of scoring and special hands; it was 'during the tumultuous period of the 1930s and 1940s' that regional variants developed. Cites Racster (1924): the Shanghai base was 20, Hong Kong's 10.
  • [17] CHALLENGES THE NODE'S PLACE: Kwan derives Hong Kong Old Style 'very directly and naturally' from the late classical game, and treats New Chapter (新章), the many-hand style, as a later re-addition to HKOS. He has no pattern-heavy stage before HKOS. His late classical game does add hands (平和, 門前清自摸, 小三元, 混么九 and others) and raises the limit to 500 or 1,000, which is the 'more patterns' the Mahjong Wiki calls new style.
  • [7] Re-read 2026-10-11 and unchanged in substance. 'New Style' means a variant with many winning conditions not found in Chinese Classical. A first wave of two styles followed: Shanghai New Style, developing from the 1920s through the 1940s, and Hong Kong New Style, from the 1950s through the 1970s. Both became overly complicated and associated with gamblers and academics, and HKOS was born as a backlash. The page says it covers Hong Kong's evolution only, not mainland new style, and cites no sources
  • [18] The wiki's family tree puts 'Shanghai/Hong Kong New Style' between Chinese Classical and HKOS. Its timeline says that in the 1920s, starting in Shanghai, more and more winning conditions were added under the 'New Style' umbrella. In the 1950s 'New Style' went on evolving in Hong Kong while public gambling houses promoted a simplified style with the classical winning conditions and no Fu, which became HKOS
  • [8] The HKOS scoring page says New Chapter and Guangdong style are often called HKNS, but that the original 'New Style' variants existed long before HKOS. It names Seven Pairs and the Jewel Dragons, both taken from Western mahjong, and Four Concealed Pungs as hands of the 'New Style' rulesets. It classes the Let's Mahjong! ruleset as New Chapter, the transition from HKOS to Guangdong style
  • [17] Chapter 9 makes 新章 a reaction to 舊章 (HKOS). Because 舊章 had too few hands, players added new ones and called the many-hand rules 新章 to tell them from 舊章. Many of the new hands had already appeared in the late classical period but were not then common. 新章 had no unified standard, each group using its own hands and values, and it was popular only briefly among university students and other intellectuals. Some of its hands passed into Japanese and Taiwanese mahjong
  • [19] Chinese Wikipedia's 麻将 compares regional rules. It says Hong Kong mahjong descends mainly from 老章 and is called 清章 or 舊章, while 廣東麻雀 adds 六獨, 十八番 and 無奇不有 hands to 清章 and is called 新章. Its section on early rules dates the earliest rules to the 1910s, the game Kwan calls Chinese Classical, and says later mahjong developed toward more hands and simpler scoring. It says nothing of a Shanghai new style
  • [9] Writing in 1925, Wei says two ways of interpreting the scoring chart and special hands were widely current among Chinese players. The liberal school lets the scorer claim the largest score possible, gives an extra double where the strict school gives ten points, recognises the moon-from-the-sea-bottom and plum-blossom hands that the strict school does not, and sets the limit at 500 instead of 300. 'Nowadays' Chinese experts play the liberal method
  • [10] A Hong Kong rules column of February 1924 answers readers on scoring. The minor Three Scholars earns an extra 'faan', and feeding an opponent his third dragon set makes the discarder pay for all the losers. The same page reports lady enthusiasts founding the first Hong Kong Mah-Jongg League with a set of basic rules

Reading it

Today's reading of the Mahjong Wiki still supports the chart: 'New Style' means any variant with many winning conditions beyond Chinese Classical, Shanghai New Style developing from the 1920s through the 1940s and Hong Kong New Style from the 1950s to the 1970s, both under classic scoring, with HKOS a backlash against them. But the wiki is one voice. Its home page, HKOS page and scoring pages share an editor with the canonical source, and none cites a source. Independent 1920s texts show change in that decade, but not the defining feature. Babcock, Tchou and the 1924 Shanghai manual record a new-method payout. Wei (1925) describes a 'liberal construction' then favoured by Chinese experts, with extra doubles where the strict school gave ten points and a 500-point limit instead of 300, which is Kwan's late classical inflation. No 1920s source names a new style or shows a large set of new hands. Chinese usage contradicts the node's Chinese name. Kwan and Chinese Wikipedia give 新章 to the many-hand Cantonese style that followed 舊章 (清章), and Kwan says it was popular only briefly among students. Depaulis and Tsui date 'Shanghai New Style' to 1950-60 in Hong Kong. Still wanted: Lo's 'Shanghai Game' chapter, Perlmen and Chan, 簡而清's 《開檯》 and the Shanghai press.

Looked for, not found

  • Official rules No body governed the 1920s Shanghai or 1950s Hong Kong new style. Web and Wikipedia searches in zh and en found no official code; the nearest, a 1924 move to found a Hong Kong Mah-Jongg League (China Mail), concerned the expatriate game
  • Tournament rules No tournaments of this historical style are known, and none turned up in the web, Archive or Wikipedia searches
  • Law No law names the style. 1920s-30s gambling measures (Canton's licence fee on mahjong sets reported in 1925, Guangzhou's 禁賭概覽 on Commons) regulate mahjong gambling generally and say nothing of rules
  • Forum Reddit and BoardGameGeek refuse automated readers, and no forum discussion of the pre-HKOS new style is known; not searched
  • Commercial Apps sell 新章 or 廣東麻雀, the later Cantonese style (for example 九龍麻雀's listing), but none sells the pre-HKOS new style
  • Organisation No organisation for the style exists or turned up in any channel searched
  • Collection No museum or library record of a 1920s new-style rule text turned up. An M+ archive record of mahjong rule documents (Wang Dahong papers) dates from the 1970s-2000s and is unrelated, and the NLC scan of the 1924 Shanghai manual is already cited as paipu-1924

Known, not yet read

Sources that look worth having but could not be read for this entry. If you can reach one, it can be read and added. Every variant’s list is gathered on Missing sources.

  • Rulebook Lo, Amy. The Book of Mah Jong: An Illustrated Guide. Tuttle, 2001. ISBN 0804833028. Chapter 5, 'The Shanghai Game' — The Archive's full-text index shows chapter 5 opening 'The Shanghai Game, also known as the New...' and a section 'Computing the Fans (the Shanghai Game)'. Depaulis and Tsui's Shanghai New Style column and Kwan's remark on additive 新章 scoring both cite Lo. It may be the source of the fan-scored 'Shanghai new style' description
    Where: https://archive.org/details/bookofmahjongill00loam (lending library), or any library copy. Tried: 2026-10-11: the djvu text answered 401 because the item is access-restricted by the Archive. Only search snippets were seen
  • Rulebook Perlmen, Samuel K. and Mark Kai-Chi Chan. The Chinese Game of Mahjong. Hong Kong: Book Marketing Ltd., 1979. ISBN 962-211-0169 — Describes Old Style and New Style as played in Hong Kong. It is the basis of Depaulis and Tsui's 1950-60 'Shanghai New Style' column and of one of the wiki's HKOS scoring tabs, so it should show what Hong Kong players called new style and when
    Where: Hong Kong and university libraries; second-hand dealers. Tried: 2026-10-11: Internet Archive advanced search by title and author found nothing; HathiTrust's catalog met a Cloudflare challenge
  • Rulebook Pritchard, D. Brine. Mahjong (Teach Yourself). Hodder Headline, 2001; also Play and Win Mah-Jong, 2013 — The Archive's full-text index shows a passage on 'the so-called New Style game', which 'abandons the free hands of the old game in favour' of patterns. It would give an outside definition of the new style, perhaps with dates
    Where: https://archive.org/details/mahjong00prit and https://archive.org/details/playwinmahjong0000prit (lending library). Tried: 2026-10-11: the djvu text answered 500 and the item is access-restricted by the Archive. Only search snippets were seen
  • Rulebook 簡而清 (Kan Yi-ching). 《開檯》. 香港：博益出版集團, 1986 — Kwan and Chinese Wikipedia both cite it for the history of 舊章, 清章 and 新章 in Hong Kong, including 六獨 (ch. 2 sec. 3). It is the Chinese-language source for when 新章 arose
    Where: Hong Kong Public Libraries; second-hand bookshops in Hong Kong. Tried: 2026-10-11: Internet Archive search by title and author found nothing; not otherwise online
  • Journalism 申報 (Shen Bao), Shanghai, 1920s-1930s: articles and columns on mahjong rules (新麻將, new methods of scoring) — Only the Shanghai press of the time can show whether a reformed or pattern-heavy Shanghai game existed in the 1920s and what it was called
    Where: Shanghai Library's 全國報刊索引 and the 申報 full-text databases (subscription); Chinese university libraries. Tried: 2026-10-11: no open access. Web searches in Chinese for 申報 with 麻將 rules returned nothing relevant
  • Historical Pai Hsien-yung (白先勇). Wandering in the Garden, Waking from a Dream: Tales of Taipei Characters. Indiana University Press, 1982 (translation of 《台北人》, 1965-71) — The Archive's full-text index shows a footnote: 'In the "New Mah-jong," Shanghai-style, the winning hands were given var[ious]...'. That suggests Shanghai émigrés knew a 'new mahjong' with named, valued hands, and the Chinese original may give its name
    Where: https://archive.org/details/wanderingingarde0000baix (lending library); the Chinese original in any edition of 《台北人》. Tried: 2026-10-11: the item is access-restricted by the Archive. Web searches for 新麻將 with 白先勇 or 永遠的尹雪艷 found nothing

Where it was searched

Every place the search checklist names for this variant’s languages, and what each gave, including nothing. The last full pass was on 2026-10-11.

Names searched: English Shanghai New Style, Hong Kong New Style, New Style, SHNS, HKNS, New Chapter, New Method, Shanghai Game, late Chinese Classical; Chinese 新章麻雀, 新章麻將, 新章麻将, 新章, 新麻將, 近時新法, 中國古典麻雀（後期）.

25 places searched
  • General web search — 2026-10-11, standard mode, ten queries: '上海 新章 麻將 1920年代 民國 番 規則', '"Shanghai New Style" mahjong history 1920s', '"新章麻雀" 歷史', '民国 上海 麻将 新规则 番数 辣子 1930年代 申报', '"上海章" 麻雀 香港 舊章 新章', Perlmen and Chan 1979, imahjong archives on Shanghai rules, Millington on Shanghai hands, and two on 白先勇's 新麻將. Extended mode once, on Republican Shanghai rule history and scholarship. Results: Sloperama FAQ 11f (chart ref, re-read), Stanwick and Xu's pre-1920 terms page (not relevant), The Paper's 麻将变迁140年 (read, nothing on rules), the App Store text of 九龍麻雀 setting Hong Kong 清章 against the 新章 of 廣東麻雀, and Sloperama's bibliography naming Perlmen and Chan (wanted). No page in Chinese names a 1920s Shanghai new style
  • Wikidata — 2026-10-11, through Special:Search because the API answered 429. Found Q1082966 (Hong Kong Mahjong scoring rules) and Q10868113 (Shanghai mahjong, the modern game of zh:上海麻將). No item for Shanghai or Hong Kong New Style or 新章. A query for 新章麻雀 itself answered 429
  • Wikipedia, in every declared language — The zh.wikipedia API answered 429 all day on 2026-10-11 (shared address), so wikitext was read through index.php?action=raw. Read 麻将 (zh-wikipedia-mahjong), which calls Hong Kong 清章/舊章 and Guangdong 新章. Read 上海麻將, an unreferenced account of today's Shanghai game (花 counts, 辣子 limit, 三口包牌) with nothing on the 1920s. Re-checked 香港麻雀 (zh-wikipedia-hk-mahjong): 老章, 清章, then 新章, citing 簡而清 1986. 老章麻雀 is a red link. English 'Mahjong' grepped: no 'new style'; it notes only Western rule revisions by the 1930s
  • The sources' own references, and who cites them — Backward: the canonical wiki page cites nothing. Kwan ch. 9 cites 簡而清《開檯》 (1986) pp. 13 and 27-28, Millington (1977) pp. 63 and 142-143, and Amy Lo (2001) for additive 新章 scoring. Kwan ch. 6 cites Millington pp. 56-68, 118 and 123-124 for the late classical additions. Chinese Wikipedia cites 簡而清 1986. Lo and 《開檯》 are listed as wanted. Second-round leads, unread: Millington items #115-#122 on added hands; 簡而清's chapter 2 section 3 on 六獨; Perlmen and Chan's New Style chapter; Rep (2007), whose hand table marks combinations as 'New style'. Forward citation not attempted: OpenAlex wants a key
  • Internet Archive full-text search — 2026-10-11. Advanced search for titles with 麻雀 or 麻將 (1920-49) found no Chinese manual. '新章 麻雀' matched only single characters in the headline lists of Hong Kong Chinese papers (華僑日報, 工商日報, 1928-1989). Full-text search: '新章麻雀' gave 0 hits and '新章麻將' gave 1, a 1997 novel ('一二五制的新章麻將'). '"Shanghai Game" "mah jong"' found Lo 2001, chapter 5 'The Shanghai Game' with 'Computing the Fans (the Shanghai Game)' (lending only). '"New Style abandons"' found Pritchard 2001 and 2013 (lending only). A search for 'new style' with 'mah jong' and Shanghai found Rep 2007's hand table and a translator's footnote in Pai Hsien-yung's Taipei People (1982) on 'New Mah-jong, Shanghai-style' (both lending only). Read in full: Wei 1925 and the China Mail of 28 February 1924. Racster 1924 is not on the Archive
  • Wayback Machine — Not searched: every page this pass needed answered live on 2026-10-11
  • Google Books — Not searched: the Books API answered 429 in earlier passes, and the books that matter (Lo 2001, Perlmen and Chan 1979, Pritchard 2001) are in copyright. The Archive's full-text index stood in for snippets
  • HathiTrust full-text search — 2026-10-11: a catalog search for 麻將 met the site's own Cloudflare challenge (403, 'Just a moment'), so full-text search was not attempted
  • WorldCat — Not searched: the wanted books are already identified by ISBN (Lo 2001, 0804833028; Perlmen and Chan 1979, 962-211-0169) or by publisher and year (簡而清, 博益 1986)
  • Scholarly indexes — Not searched by API: OpenAlex wants a key and answered 429 in earlier passes. The extended web search named 周海雄、王雁玲《麻将的起源与演变》 (宁波大学学报, 2002) and a 2011 Yunnan University thesis 《麻将源流考》. Both treat origins, not 1920s rules; leads only
  • YouTube — Not searched: a style extinct since the HKOS era has no rules videos, and videos labelled 新章 or 廣東麻雀 show the later Cantonese style
  • English-language forums — Not searched: Reddit answers 403 and BoardGameGeek sets a Cloudflare challenge for automated readers, and no forum thread on the 1920s style is known
  • Mahjong reference sites — Mahjong Wiki read 2026-10-11: rules:hong-kong-new-style-overview (canonical), the home page (chart ref 7), rules:hong-kong-old-style-scoring (chart ref 28) and rules:chinese-classical-scoring, whose SHNS columns were re-checked and give no source. Sloperama FAQ 11f (chart ref 3) re-read. Sloperama's bibliography page (shanghai/Images/bookofma.htm) says Perlmen and Chan (1979) cover 'both Old Style and New Style' as played in Hong Kong. These are the chart's own sources or by the same authors, so none is independent
  • App and platform listings — Not searched directly. The web search returned the App Store listing of 九龍麻雀, which sets Hong Kong 清章/舊章 against the 新章 of 廣東麻雀, the later Cantonese style. No app plays a pre-HKOS new style
  • English-language newspaper archives — The Internet Archive's Hong Kong English papers (China Mail, Hong Kong Daily Press, Hong Kong Telegraph) and Shanghai's China Press are searchable in full text. Read the China Mail of 28 February 1924 (Mah-Jongg Notes). Leads, unread: the China Mail of 14 February 1924 on Sun Yat-sen's mahjong ban, and the Hong Kong Daily Press of 6 March 1925 on Canton's licence fee for mahjong sets. Chronicling America, Trove, Papers Past and the BNA not searched: the node concerns play in China, not the Western craze
  • Statutes published in English — Not searched: no statute names a playing style, and Hong Kong's gambling law licenses mahjong parlours without reference to new or old style
  • Baidu search and Tieba — Not searched directly: Baidu has no open API and Tieba refuses automated readers. Chinese queries through the general search tool stood in for it and found no mainland page on a 1920s Shanghai new style
  • Baidu Baike — Not searched: Baidu Baike answered 403 in earlier passes
  • Chinese Q&A and community sites — Not searched: Zhihu answers 403 and Xiaohongshu has a login wall. A Zhihu column (zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/134293016, 关于麻将规则) surfaced in the extended search, unread
  • WeChat public-account articles — Not searched: Sogou WeChat search has no open API
  • Bilibili — Not searched: its explainers cover today's 广东麻将 (新章) and Shanghai games, not the 1920s style
  • Pre-modern and Republican Chinese texts — Chinese Wikisource and ctext not searched; ctext asks not to be scraped. Wikimedia Commons' NLC and CADAL scans searched 2026-10-11 through Special:Search, since the API answered 429. Among Chinese manuals with 麻雀 or 麻將 in the title, only 繪圖麻雀牌譜 turned up (paipu-1924, already read). Republican magazines (紅雜誌 1922, 小說新報 1923 '麻雀新樂府', 禮拜六 1935-36) carry mahjong essays and verse, not rules. Japanese manuals of 1925-29 from the National Library of Korea (麻雀の遊び方, 麻雀新戰術, 麻雀疑問解答, 趣味の麻雀) are on Commons, unread
  • Chinese-language scholarship — CNKI needs a subscription. The titles the web search named (周海雄、王雁玲 2002; 《麻将源流考》 2011) concern origins. Kwan's online book (kwan-2009-history), chapters 6 and 9, was read instead
  • Chinese-language newspaper archives — Shen Bao (申報) and the Republican periodicals are in subscription databases, listed as wanted. The Internet Archive's Hong Kong Chinese papers (華僑日報, 香港工商日報, 工商晚報, 香港華字晚報) carry headline lists and poor OCR. On 2026-10-11 headline searches for 新章麻雀, 舊章麻雀, 上海麻雀 and 新式麻雀 each gave 0. HKPL's MMIS not tried, since it queues automated readers
  • Statutes published in Chinese — Not searched: no statute in Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan or the PRC names a playing style. A 1930s Guangzhou gambling-ban compendium (禁賭概覽, on Commons) bans mahjong gambling but gives no rules

In the tree

Descends from Chinese classical, as the source chart draws it.

Descends into

← back to the tree