SLOPER ON MAH-JONGG

By Tom Sloper
July 12, 2015
Column #639

American Mah Jongg (National Mah Jongg League rules). I've written about the "window of opportunity" before (column 458, July 2010). But my definition has since expanded. In explaining the League's rule, I referred to official sources only: the official rulebook and several yearly newsletters. Thence I came up with this (FAQ 19-C):

The "window of opportunity" (during which a player may claim a discard) opens when a tile is "down," and closes when next player either racks, discards, declares mah-jongg, or exchanges a joker.

You see that although there is just one thing that opens the window, there are four things that can close the window. Actually, there may be even more! Let's examine each of those events a little more closely.

Opening the window. When a player discards a tile, the window of opportunity to claim that discard opens.

Closing the window. There are four (or, arguably, more) things that can close the window:

Next player racks. The word "racks" is blue and underlined, above, because that term has come into question many times (so I wrote FAQ 19-AD to define it). A picked tile is "racked" when it is placed among the player's concealed tiles. Frequent sticky question: "what if someone else calls for the discard just as the next in turn is racking?" In that sticky case, you have to consider whether the picker picked and racked a little too quickly, or if the caller delayed just a hair too long. If a picker is pausing just a beat before picking, then she's allowed enough time for another player to call the live discard. Someone who doesn't speak until a reasonable-speed picker is in the act of racking has probably taken a hair too long deciding to call the discard, and is too late. (Of interest: the Chinese rule is that a caller has a 3-second window.)

Next player discards. When the next in line picks a tile from the wall and discards it (without racking, which is permissible), the window has closed on the previous discard. A window now opens on the new discard.

Next player declares mah-jongg. When the next in line picks a tile from the wall, looks at it, and declares mah-jongg, the window is closed.

Next player exchanges a joker. When the next in line picks a tile from the wall and uses it to redeem a joker, the window is closed.

Someone claims the discard, but next in turn supersedes the claim. One could say that someone claiming the discard is a fifth way to close the window - but actually, if that someone was not next in turn, the window is still not necessarily closed! The next in line from the discarder can still claim the discard (as long as the first claimant has not yet racked it).

To read more columns, Click the entries in the header frame, above. Can't see header frame because you're viewing this column in full screen? Tap this icon to see the list of columns with nav frames. Anytime you want to get rid of nav frames, you can just tap a mobile icon.

Question or comment about this column? I often, um... intentionally... "miss" something; maybe you'll be the first one to spot it! Email and the discussion will be posted on the Mah-Jongg Q&A Bulletin Board. Hit me with your best shot! Like this...

When is the window closed for mah-jongg?

>From: judith o
>Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 4:38 PM
>Subject: Question about tile for MJ
>Is the following (color emphasis mine) as a reference only to discarded tiles during a game: “One could say that someone claiming the discard is a fifth way to close the window - but actually, if that someone was not next in turn, the window is still not necessarily closed! The next in line from the discarder can still claim the discard (as long as the first claimant has not yet racked it). “ In other words, does the same apply to calling a tile for MJ?
>Here is the situation: East discarded a tile. I called it for MJ, immediately placing it on my rack and added 3 of my 4 exposures...at which time my friend ~ sitting to the right of East~ says,”I’ll take it for MJ.
>Who gets the tile? The second claimant, sitting to the right of East or the first claimant, who has placed the tile and additional exposures on her rack before the second claimant speaks up???? Is the window open *forever* for MJ????
>I looked through FAQ and couldn’t find an answer. I apologize if I missed it.
>Judith T. O

Hi, Judith! Welcome to my website. Your question:

East discarded a tile. I called it for MJ, immediately placing it on my rack and added 3 of my 4 exposures...at which time my friend ~ sitting to the right of East~ says,”I’ll take it for MJ.
>Who gets the tile?
Your friend should not have spoken. You had exposed your tiles. ~~Now everybody knows what your friend needs, and it's her own fault for speaking after you made your exposure.~~**

Is the window open *forever* for MJ????
No. In the text you quoted (I assume you found it either here on my website*** or in my book), it's stated that the window to claim mah-jongg is still open if the claimant has merely spoken the claim, without sealing the deal with action. If that doesn't clarify sufficiently, rephrase the question or ask a new question, and I will do my best to clarify.

Also: this answer is just my interpretation of the official rules. If you want a more authoritative answer, you should snailmail your question to the League. Their snailmail address is on the card. Don't telephone the question (see FAQ 19-BN).

May the tiles be with you.
Tom Sloper
トム·スローパー
湯姆斯洛珀
Creator of the Sloper On Mah-Jongg column and the Mah-Jongg FAQs -- donations appreciated.
Author of "The Red Dragon & The West Wind," the definitive book on Mah-Jongg East & West.
Los Angeles, California, USA
March 17, 2017

** See follow-up Q&A dated Sunday, March 19, higher up on this board. - Tom
*** Thanks to Google, I found the quote, in column 639. Appending this exchange to that column. - Tom

When is the window closed for MJ, part 2

>From: judith o
>Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2017 8:45 AM
>Subject: Re: Question about tile for MJ
>Thank you for your reply.As we have a tournament coming up, I shall do as you suggest and run it by the NMJL. However, a section of your reply to my question confuses me. I agree that my friend ought not to have spoken as it caused some tension at the table; I have no idea why she waited. In her defense, she was also calling the tile for MJ; she was certain that her position to the right of East allowed her to have the tile even though I had already taken the tile and exposed most of my MJ. (And, yes, I found the original text both on your site and in your book.) Here is the original post from your web site with what confused me in italics:
>>Now everybody knows what your friend needs, and it's her own fault for speaking after you made your exposure.
>Judith

Hi, Judith. You wrote:

I shall do as you suggest and run it by the NMJL.
Good idea. I would like to quote to you from the League's 2013 newsletter:

Q. Two players called for the same tile for an exposure. The second player who called started to make her exposure but next in turn announced that she wanted that tile also. Who is entitled to the tile?
A. Just as long as the other player started to make her exposure, next in turn was TOO LATE.

I acknowledge that this Q&A is about exposure, not mah-jongg. But surely the exact same rule applies to two claims for mah-jongg as well. I think you ought to mention that 2013 ruling in your letter to the current leadership of the League. It's unfortunate that this rule is not included in the 2013 revision of the League's official rulebook.

I have no idea why she waited. In her defense, she was also calling the tile for MJ;
Yes, you said it before. Two people calling the tile for the same thing. One acted and exposed before the other spoke.

she was certain that her position to the right of East allowed her to have the tile even though I had already taken the tile and exposed most of my MJ.
She was wrong. Here on my website, read FAQ 19-H (read the whole thing). In my book, see page 53, rule 63.ii. And see the quote (above) from the 2013 newsletter.

Here is the original post from your web site with what confused me in italics:
>>Now everybody knows what your friend needs, and it's her own fault for speaking after you made your exposure.
Sorry about that! I misspoke there; it's not important what tile she needed, since the hand has ended with you winning. Please disregard it.*

* Actually, now I remember what I was thinking when I said that. What if the first claimant had made a mistake? What if the first claimant's mah-jongg was erroneous, or if she had called based on a misnamed discard? The second claimant can have the discard if the first one went dead (for mah-jongg only - this rule does not apply to calls for mere exposure). It might be that the first claimant is dead, and the second claimant decides not to take the tile after all - but because she's spoken, people now have information about her hand. (Okay, so now that I explained all that, it was still a goof when I said that the first time, because while crafting the reply I forgot that both were claiming for mah-jongg.) - Tom

If you appreciate the free information on this site, your donation would be gratefully accepted,
and would help keep this site running as a free service. Thank you!

DONATE!

Need rules for American mah-jongg? Tom Sloper's book, The Red Dragon & The West Wind, is the most comprehensive book about the American game, including official rules not included in the official rulebook. AND see FAQ 19 for fine points of the American rules (and commonly misunderstood rules). AND get the official rulebook from the NMJL (see FAQ 3).

See Tom Sloper's interview at sinovision.net:
http://video.sinovision.net/?id=24552&cid=122
http://video.sinovision.net/?id=24550&cid=122

Where to order the yearly NMJL card: Read FAQ 7i.