Houdini 1.5 running for the IPON

[Graham Banks]

Not allowing the games,probably he (Ingo) is afraid that the Book Authors will steal/copy his opening moves lines

Ingo only operates Shredder in major tournaments. I don't think he writes the book as well.

[IWB]

I would be quite curious, if you were willing to do the test, to see the same gauntlet but with the EGTBs installed and activated (incredibly easy to do BTW), to see the result.

Hi Albert,

You might have missed it, but I always test with Table- or Bitbases if available (but only with 4 pc, which are always completly in the memory after a few accesses and therefore VERY fast after that) I do with Houdini as well (GTB!). Now I guess you want me test the same 1900 without ... Actually I did some testing in the past, with the result that, at least with 4 pc, there is little or none difference to any direction.

Bye
Ingo

[IWB]

Not allowing the games,probably he (Ingo) is afraid that the Book Authors will steal/copy his opening moves lines

Ingo only operates Shredder in major tournaments. I don't think he writes the book as well.

Absolutly right, I have no idea about books, but I know that books are completly in vain (or might even harm the result) if you want to test an engine!

Bye
Ingo

[Sedat Canbaz]

Not allowing the games,probably he (Ingo) is afraid that the Book Authors will steal/copy his opening moves lines

Ingo only operates Shredder in major tournaments. I don't think he writes the book as well.

Hello dear Graham,

Maybe you are right,but i will start to believe to my eyes only after when i see/check the games by myself,only then i can make any serious conclusion

But for right now this list is meaningless...sorry Igno

You know Graham,there a such word 'cheating',i don't accuse nobody for right now...
But to be sure we need to check the games-depths,opening positions,endgames,adjudications and so on...

Now we see only words and table-that's all,no more no less

How we can be sure,how can we trust about such list,without publishing games

Look,to avoid any suspicious of any cheating (during whole SCCT Prize Book Tournaments),
i have used directly LIVE,using second PC/Justin TV/Web camera and i published the games almost daily

Actually if i was a mod in chess forums,i would not allow any tournaments/ratings without publishing games

In my opinion,if the games are private,then the results should be private too

And i see some people are thinking that 'we have/need to show respect'...for what ???
Hmm...respect a such thing that its 'earning' during work in long time
I think mostly computerchess fans (including me) will start to show respect when can benefit from that


And last (a note for sedatchess's critisizors):
-yes,be in a hurry,i have a lot of tons of work,efforts,it's much easier to find holes in my lists/books

Best Regards,
Sedat

[IWB]

Hi Sedat

Do I go around and tell everyone who writes something about your lists what I think eabout it? No, I told YOU an you seem to have a problem with that.


Again: if you don't like my list ignore it. You asked for the same favor and I follow.

Regards
Ingo

Ps: typed on an Android, sorry for that.

[Trajkoski Goran 02]

On fast time controls 1 min + 1sec/move on core i7 720QM Fritz 12 Gui Fritz 12 opening book the result is:
Houdini 1.5 - Rybka 4: +12 =13 -6 +68 Elo

After 39 games Houdini is now +63 elo over Rybka 4 @ 40moves/5. This is a gain of +43 over version 1.03a on my rating list.

After 52 games On fast time controls 1 min + 1sec/move on core i7 720QM Fritz 12 Gui Fritz 12 opening book the result is:
Houdini 1.5 - Rybka 4: +18 =24 -10 +54 Elo

[/quote]

On intermediate tame control 8 min/game + 4 sec/move after 30 games the result is:
Houdini 1.5 - Rybka 4: +5=19-6 -12elo

[George Tsavdaris]

Not allowing the games,probably he (Ingo) is afraid that the Book Authors will steal/copy his opening moves lines

Ingo only operates Shredder in major tournaments. I don't think he writes the book as well.

Absolutly right, I have no idea about books, but I know that books are completly in vain (or might even harm the result) if you want to test an engine!

I don't agree.
I agree that testing without books, with a very large set of different starting positions probably gives which is the strongest engine generally so which is the strongest engine for analysis purposes but that is not the whole story.

Because and let's suppose that Houdini 1.5 is 3010 ELO and Rybka 4 2955 ELO in you conditions that is with a big set of random positions, then can we say that Houdini is generally the strongest program than Rybka by all means?

No! ►Since perhaps there is an opening book, let's call it OPB1 that if all engines in your tournament use it to make Rybka 4 stronger than Houdini 1.5 with the same conditions of your list and let's say it will make her have 3105 ELO and Houdini 1.5 3010.
Let now use a different opening book for Houdini. And another one and another one until we find which fits it better and make it stronger. Let's do the other with the other engines on your list.

►So perhaps there is a configuration of opening books OPB1, OPB2, OPB3, etc... for Rybka 4, Houdini 1.5, Stockfish 1.9.1, etc... that will make Rybka 4 to have e.g an ELO of 3090, Houdini an ELO of 3020 and that no opening book for Houdini can be found(or can exist) that can beat Rybka's 4 ELO by using the OPB1.

So our verdict would be that Rybka 4 + Opening Book-1 is the stronger Chess playing entity than Houdini 1.5 (with any opening book that exists).
Houdini 1.5 can't beat Rybka 4+OPB1 no matter what.

These 2 ways of testing(with and without opening books) are completely different in kind, but both are useful and interesting.

[George Tsavdaris]

Quick summary:
All the other programs are bleeding out of their ears.
On all the mini-matches played that I examined, Houdini 1.5 won them fairly decisively.

Atm after 170 games it's 90elo better than the previous version. Error margins are around 50elo atm, so in the worst case it's at least 40 elo better than the previous version. Realistically 50 elo is something to expect, which is beyond 35elo that Robert humbly announced and well beyond level of Rybka 4.
Houdini 1.5-Rybka 3 elo difference will now certainly surpass Rybka 1.0 beta-Fruit 2.1 difference.
Let's see now will some vain programmers give credit where credit is due, or they'll continue to apply double standards as usual...

Are you saying that if you take a really strong program such as Robbolitto and add 50-60 ELO, it distinguishes you as a programmer?

If so, then I completely agree with you. That is something I can respect because I think that is difficult. Of course I know that you think it's easy, so I'm not sure why you are getting so excited. Anyway, for some reason I was thinking YOU were the one with the double standard. So I guess we both agree that both Vas and Robert Houdart are talented and original thinkers! I think we have made some progress with you today!

LOL. He fell into a trap. In fact he dug the hole himself.

He made the wrong comparison.
He said:
"Houdini 1.5-Rybka 3 elo difference will now certainly surpass Rybka 1.0 beta-Fruit 2.1 difference."

While he should have compared Houdini 1.5-Rybka 3 elo difference with Rybka 4.0-Fruit 2.1 difference.
Vas(assuming he did started with Fruit) improved Fruit 2.1 by a huge number of points more than what Robert(assuming he started with Rybka 3) improved Rybka 3.

So if Robert deserves credit, Vas deserves a throne.

[Sedat Canbaz]

Hello Ingo,

but maybe you can tell me more because that is the point where I might learn something and hopefully can improve my list.

I think the above text belongs to you,so i didnt mean to hurt you,i'm sorry for that,but if you check carefully my statements,you will notice that i have nothing personally with you,just my talking is about only for your list (publishing the games)


And as i mentioned before,you asked me and now i've replayed you,i just wanted to help you on improving your list

Really i did did expect a such reaction from you,even you called me a 'jealous'/'i have a problem with that'...
And please choose better words about me because next time i will be not so kind against you

However,it depends on you,its your choice-to publish the games or not,but now you know the true-what is my opinion for your list

Ok,before to finish this discussion,i have a little proverb for you:
-Before criticizing a man,walk a mile in his shoes


Thats All...

Best,
Sedat

[Milos]

Because and let's suppose that Houdini 1.5 is 3010 ELO and Rybka 4 2955 ELO in you conditions that is with a big set of random positions, then can we say that Houdini is generally the strongest program than Rybka by all means?

No! ►Since perhaps there is an opening book, let's call it OPB1 that if all engines in your tournament use it to make Rybka 4 stronger than Houdini 1.5 with the same conditions of your list and let's say it will make her have 3105 ELO and Houdini 1.5 3010.
Let now use a different opening book for Houdini. And another one and another one until we find which fits it better and make it stronger. Let's do the other with the other engines on your list.

►So perhaps there is a configuration of opening books OPB1, OPB2, OPB3, etc... for Rybka 4, Houdini 1.5, Stockfish 1.9.1, etc... that will make Rybka 4 to have e.g an ELO of 3090, Houdini an ELO of 3020 and that no opening book for Houdini can be found(or can exist) that can beat Rybka's 4 ELO by using the OPB1.

So our verdict would be that Rybka 4 + Opening Book-1 is the stronger Chess playing entity than Houdini 1.5 (with any opening book that exists).
Houdini 1.5 can't beat Rybka 4+OPB1 no matter what.

These 2 ways of testing(with and without opening books) are completely different in kind, but both are useful and interesting.

If you continue to be a good boy, maybe Santa will also bring you Rybka bugfix.
And you should be proud, believing in Santa is so nice .