Robodini

[kranium]

Exactly.
I don't have anything against Houdart. He is a talented guy. I am just stating the facts.

What I learned reading posts about Rybka and now Houdini is that most fanboys believe what they want to believe. They don't care about the actual facts and there is no point in arguing with them. So I will stop here.

some resort to personal insults if you post something with which they don't agree,
don't stop posting...just ignore it!

[h1a8]

Exactly.
I don't have anything against Houdart. He is a talented guy. I am just stating the facts.

What I learned reading posts about Rybka and now Houdini is that most fanboys believe what they want to believe. They don't care about the actual facts and there is no point in arguing with them. So I will stop here.

The problem is "What are the facts?"

Calling something a fact doesn't make it one.

[IGarcia]

And the name Robodini is from Dr.Wael Deeb (in 2011) :

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=22811

from Dr.Wael Deeb Date 2011-09-01 15:29

You mean ROBODINI

I am extremely glad to contribute to the computer chess community

In spanish is more funny (or offensive) depending the point of view, because "robo" means steal. So for us sounds like stealedini

[zullil]

Exactly.
I don't have anything against Houdart. He is a talented guy. I am just stating the facts.

What I learned reading posts about Rybka and now Houdini is that most fanboys believe what they want to believe. They don't care about the actual facts and there is no point in arguing with them. So I will stop here.

I note that you've conveniently avoided answering my question. At least Norman provided a list of "great ideas" that might explain why Houdini is currently so far ahead of the pack.

As is rather well known here, I'm certainly no Houdini "fanboy." Never even used the engine.

[zullil]

And the name Robodini is from Dr.Wael Deeb (in 2011) :

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=22811

from Dr.Wael Deeb Date 2011-09-01 15:29

You mean ROBODINI

I am extremely glad to contribute to the computer chess community

In spanish is more funny (or offensive) depending the point of view, because "robo" means steal. So for us sounds like stealedini

Even in English, "rob" is a synonym for "steal."

[Lavir]

Alex didn't say 'just parameter tuning' or 'no new ideas'...
he said 'no new revolutionary' ideas.

But the fact still remains that I already asked you once and you naturally didn't reply: if as you say it's "nothing new under the sun" why don't you do it yourself? If something can be done easily everybody can do the same, isn't it?

You state no "revolutionary idea" (whatever the hell that means) and you quote a mix of ideas coming from Stockfish and Ippo; so, if that's the case, why the hell don't you do the same and create something better?.

If you (and your friends) aren't able to do it, then it's obvious that it's not so easy as you say and maybe (just maybe) there's something you don't clearly understand in the process, isn't it?

Then, for the point of "personal" insults, it's difficult not to go on the personal when people continue posting things as if they are "easy" yet they cannot do the same.

That would be the same as a poet continuing to insist Rimbaud didn't create nothing new and yet not being able to write something neither remotely beautiful as him. That wouldn't make much sense, and would just make you ridiculed by everyone with a bit of expertise in poetry or at least with a minimum of intelligence now, wouldn't it?

[Modern Times]

The problem is "What are the facts?"

Calling something a fact doesn't make it one.

Exactly !!

[rvida]

(my guess for biggest improvement: space eval...missing entirely in Ippolit source code, just see Stockfish for a good one)

Bingo!

Well, to be honest, I don't believe it is the biggest improvement (except for Chess960)... Just that it is in there. And it is computed exactly the same way as in Stockfish btw.

[Don]

Exactly.
I don't have anything against Houdart. He is a talented guy. I am just stating the facts.

What I learned reading posts about Rybka and now Houdini is that most fanboys believe what they want to believe. They don't care about the actual facts and there is no point in arguing with them. So I will stop here.

The problem is "What are the facts?"

Calling something a fact doesn't make it one.

I think we are mixing up facts with opinions. We probably mostly agree on the facts but we disagree about things that are legal/moral/ethical or just simply a matter of opinion.

For example what we know is a fact is that Houdini IS a modified version of Robbolito. But what we disagree on is whether he innovated, or simply made incremental improvements to this base. But that is a pretty silly thing to even argue about because that is a matter of definition and opinion and is mostly hidden anyway. We disagree on how easy/hard it is to make improvements to an existing strong program but again, that is a pretty silly argument because for some that would be easy and for others it will be difficult.

One forum poster on this thread thinks that "everybody" would be doing it if it were easy but that must be his opinion because how can he know that? That's not a fact, it's an opinion. Did he take a survey to see how many people tried and failed? As far as I know very very few people tried to improve it and the ones that we are aware of DID make significant improvements. So there are hardly any facts being reported here at all, just speculation and opinion.

Richard Vida make a post about Robodini which verifies what we already know - probably the only fact we agree on, that Houdini came from Robbo sources:

Q: How you did it?

A: I took the Robbolito sources and backported all the changes Robert made.

I don't think that fact is in question is it? So what else is there to talk about? Whether Robert Houdart is smart? Did he improve Robbolito significantly? We all agree on the answers to those questions so enough is enough.

[Master Om]

Exactly.
I don't have anything against Houdart. He is a talented guy. I am just stating the facts.

What I learned reading posts about Rybka and now Houdini is that most fanboys believe what they want to believe. They don't care about the actual facts and there is no point in arguing with them. So I will stop here.

The problem is "What are the facts?"

Calling something a fact doesn't make it one.

I think we are mixing up facts with opinions. We probably mostly agree on the facts but we disagree about things that are legal/moral/ethical or just simply a matter of opinion.

For example what we know is a fact is that Houdini IS a modified version of Robbolito. But what we disagree on is whether he innovated, or simply made incremental improvements to this base. But that is a pretty silly thing to even argue about because that is a matter of definition and opinion and is mostly hidden anyway. We disagree on how easy/hard it is to make improvements to an existing strong program but again, that is a pretty silly argument because for some that would be easy and for others it will be difficult.

One forum poster on this thread thinks that "everybody" would be doing it if it were easy but that must be his opinion because how can he know that? That's not a fact, it's an opinion. Did he take a survey to see how many people tried and failed? As far as I know very very few people tried to improve it and the ones that we are aware of DID make significant improvements. So there are hardly any facts being reported here at all, just speculation and opinion.

Richard Vida make a post about Robodini which verifies what we already know - probably the only fact we agree on, that Houdini came from Robbo sources:

Q: How you did it?

A: I took the Robbolito sources and backported all the changes Robert made.

I don't think that fact is in question is it? So what else is there to talk about? Whether Robert Houdart is smart? Did he improve Robbolito significantly? We all agree on the answers to those questions so enough is enough.

Only thing to talk about is when Komodo MP is coming ? I am dying of desperation to get it.