Reviewed by: AV1979 Date: 09/25/2008 I had bought this on Video CD when I lived in New York and clearly, this is a shot-on-video ripoff, combining elements from BLACK MASK (1996) and GOD OF GAMBLERS (1989). Sik Siu-Lung plays John Ko, the hero from the previous shot-on-video TEENAGE GAMBLER. Here, John gets challenged by a villainous gambler Kong Lo (Lam Wai). When John refuses, Kong takes no remorse and sends his two top men, an assassin (Xing Yu from FLASH POINT) and a mysterious masked fighter (Sze Hung-Bor) to get John and his friends. When his friends Karen (Bessie Chan) and Sing (Chow Chow) are harrassed, they are rescued by a man named Ian, who turns out to be the masked fighter. The masked fighter tries to change his ways, but Kong tells the masked fighter he has no choice after taking on the assassin himself. Meanwhile, when John learns his Uncle Ted (Fung Hak-On) has set him up as well, John has no other choice but to fight through the two fighters before the final gambling challenge against Kong. This film seems muddled all over the place. While a plus is the action sequences choreographed by Fung Hak-On, the plot is pretty much ridiculous. The character of Sing Chow is beyond an annoyance as he does nothing but either sit on his butt all day or dancing with girls at a nightclub, like he is an adult. It is never known as well why the character of Ian wears a mask and thankfully, there is no subplot involving superhuman genetics like in the BLACK MASK series. Ian just wears a mask and fights, that's all their is to it. The sad thing is, that despite Ian's wanting of a change of heart, he resorts to having to fight John himself as if he is a "dog" of Kong Lo, played by Lam Wai. The highlights, as mentioned is John's hand-to-hand combat against Ian and later, Xing Yu's assassin. Sik, Sze, and Xing clearly have amazing skills in martial arts and thankfully, they are shot pretty well. The final gambling battle between John and Kong is pretty typical and it is clear how this will end. Overall, out of 10, I'd have to give this a 3. Reviewer Score: 3