Every year, the National Mah Jongg League publishes its official card. For most players, this is an exciting moment—new hands, new combinations, a fresh year of play. And that's fine. Excitement has its place.

But I approach the card differently. I approach it the way an attorney approaches a statute. Because that, fundamentally, is what the NMJL card is: a governing document. It defines what is legal and what is not. It establishes the boundaries within which all play must occur. And like any governing document, it is subject to interpretation.

What follows is my analysis of the 2004 card, section by section. This is not casual reading. If you want casual reading, there are other blogs for that. This is a working document. Treat it accordingly.

Preliminary Observations

The 2004 card introduces several changes from 2003 that I want to flag before getting into specifics:

  1. The "2468" family has been restructured. Several hands from last year's card have been removed or revalued. This is significant and, in my opinion, overdue.
  2. New exposures have been added in the "Consecutive Run" section that create interesting strategic opportunities.
  3. The "Winds-Dragons" section contains what I believe is an ambiguity that I will address below.

Section Analysis: The 2468 Family

Let me begin with what I consider to be the most consequential change on this year's card. The 2468 family has historically been a bread-and-butter section for intermediate players. The hands are relatively straightforward to build, they score adequately, and they don't require the exotic tile combinations that some of the higher-value hands demand.

However, the 2004 card has made adjustments that, in my reading, fundamentally alter the strategic calculus of pursuing a 2468-family hand. Specifically, the removal of the paired 2468 hand (last year's card, line 3 of the section) means that players who relied on that hand as a fallback option now need to redirect their attention elsewhere.

My recommendation: if you are drawing heavily into the 2468 family in the first Charleston, you should be prepared to pivot. I have developed a decision tree for this scenario that I may share in a future post, depending on interest.

The Winds-Dragons Ambiguity

Here is where I need to be precise, because I anticipate disagreement.

The Winds-Dragons section of the 2004 card includes a hand that requires "NEWS" plus a dragon pair. The question that I believe has not been adequately addressed by the community is this: does the order of the NEWS tiles matter? The card shows them in the order N-E-W-S, which is, of course, a play on the English word "news." But is that ordering prescriptive or illustrative?

In my analysis, the ordering is illustrative. Here is my reasoning:

The NMJL has, in past publications, used card layout for visual clarity rather than prescriptive ordering. If we look at the "Consecutive Run" section, for example, the tiles shown are clearly meant to represent a type of hand rather than a fixed sequence. The same logic should apply to the Winds-Dragons section.

Furthermore, if we treat the ordering as prescriptive, we create an inconsistency with how other sections are interpreted. You cannot have it both ways. Either the card layout defines legal sequences, or it provides representative examples. The community has, to my knowledge, consistently treated it as the latter.

I am aware that some players disagree. I have heard the argument that "NEWS is a word and therefore constitutes a specific sequence." This is, in my professional opinion, a weak argument. If the NMJL wanted to prescribe a specific ordering, they would do so explicitly. The fact that the tiles happen to spell a word is incidental. It's the kind of thing that might amuse you at first glance but should not form the basis of competitive strategy.

I am prepared to defend this position in whatever forum is appropriate. If the Rules Committee wishes to clarify, I welcome their input. Until then, I will continue to play the hand as I have described, and I encourage others to do the same.

Concluding Thoughts

The 2004 card is, overall, a solid piece of work by the League. My criticisms are targeted and specific. I raise them not to undermine the NMJL but to encourage the kind of rigorous engagement with the card that I believe elevates the game.

In my next post, I will be sharing my strategy for the Quintessential Quints hand, which I consider to be the most underappreciated hand on the current card. Stay tuned.

— Bob Loblaw, Attorney at Tiles

Disclaimer: This analysis represents my personal interpretation of the NMJL card and should not be construed as an official ruling. For official rulings, please contact the National Mah Jongg League directly. I am not affiliated with the NMJL in any official capacity, although I have, in the past, submitted written comments to the Rules Committee regarding several matters of concern.