Stockfish 090613 beating all Houdini versions @ 40/40

[michiguel]

"I have no intention to get into a silly fight."

Then don't start one, because that is what you are doing.

There is nothing wrong with my post, move on.

No, I was trying hard to avoid it since being a moderator puts me in a total disadvantage. You started insulting me for no reason, and I declined to follow the same path. I cannot and I will not engage in this type of exchanges.

Miguel

[michiguel]

Your concern is touching for others Miguel, the funny thing is you only hold my post to this standard. I did not hear this concern at anytime in the past or present until now. Here is a recent post by Larry Kaufman that gives partial results and speculation. And Larry is trying to sell Komodo 5.1 on CCC to CCC members Mr. Moderator. Where is your concern here Miguel.

You are absolutely right about that. It is like the 'commercial exhortations' note of CCC charter doesn't exist when it comes to their beloved engine.

huh? I have not idea what this is about. Komodo my beloved engine? But if you have a problem with the moderation, use PM.

Miguel

[Adam Hair]

Stockfish is moving so fast, I can not even keep up. This version I am testing is already many version behind the the current version and I am testing one that is only 3 days old.

I love the fact that the stockfish team is giving the public ever development version. It will keep me busy for some time.

As for Houdini, I hear it will not be out with a new version before next year.

If this is the case it maybe likely Houdini will no longer be the top chess engine.

It is possible going by the current results, that stockfish has already passed Houdini as the top chess engine, but it will take more test games to know for sure. But current results are looking good for Stockfish.

Stockfish is making quite a bit of progress. However, not every developmental version that Marco releases actually contains a functional change. In fact, there is no functional difference between the version with the timestamp 1371145832, released on June 13, and the version timestamped 1371381670, which was released on June 16.

[mwyoung]

PS. I found the development versions of Stockfish are also weaker at short time controls, but getting better. My games are at longer time controls, the development versions of Stockfish were doing much better then Stockfish 3 against Houdini 3. That is what got me started testing development version of stockfish at long time controls, I was curious.

They are better, and they are strong- but they are no match for Houdini 3. I am sorry- but such is life.

I don't know the if you are correct or not, since no one has tested them yet that I know of at longer time controls. I will let the results speak for themselves.

That is why as chess engine testers, we test, and share our results. Would love to see more data points on this other then my own. But most likely that will not happen until a official release of Stockfish 4 or 3.5 or what ever the Stockfish team calls then next official version.

[Adam Hair]

The thread topic is Stockfish 090613 beating all Houdini versions @ 40/40, and I was expecting more than 8 games, or if 8 games, 8-0 result.

I don't know what to say to this. You did read the post, because all information is posted. And I assume you know the meaning of "all Houdini versions". 24 games have been played in my post against all Houdini versions not 8, with 50 games played.

And even the title makes no conclusions, just states the current outcome at this point in the testing. No conclusions were ever made.

Beginning a thread titled Stockfish 090613 beating all Houdini versions @ 40/40 leads people to think you are sharing a significant result.

[geots]

Stockfish is moving so fast, I can not even keep up. This version I am testing is already many version behind the the current version and I am testing one that is only 3 days old.

I love the fact that the stockfish team is giving the public ever development version. It will keep me busy for some time.

As for Houdini, I hear it will not be out with a new version before next year.

If this is the case it maybe likely Houdini will no longer be the top chess engine.

It is possible going by the current results, that stockfish has already passed Houdini as the top chess engine, but it will take more test games to know for sure. But current results are looking good for Stockfish.

Stockfish is making quite a bit of progress. However, not every developmental version that Marco releases actually contains a functional change. In fact, there is no functional difference between the version with the timestamp 1371145832, released on June 13, and the version timestamped 1371381670, which was released on June 16.

Adam, it cannot beat Houdini 3. But IF it could, it still would not be Number 1 now- because I will bet any amount of money I can get my hands on there is not a development version right now that can beat Komodo MP. I have tested it too much. That is a promise from me to you.

As for 2 weeks from now, or next month- the way it is spitting out Stockfish versions- who knows. And Marco, besides being a friend, is no dummy. All I can tell you is what I see now. No Ouija board at my house.



Best-

george

[geots]

PS. I found the development versions of Stockfish are also weaker at short time controls, but getting better. My games are at longer time controls, the development versions of Stockfish were doing much better then Stockfish 3 against Houdini 3. That is what got me started testing development version of stockfish at long time controls, I was curious.

They are better, and they are strong- but they are no match for Houdini 3. I am sorry- but such is life.

I don't know the if you are correct or not, since no one has tested them yet that I know of at longer time controls. I will let the results speak for themselves.

That is why as chess engine testers, we test, and share our results. Would love to see more data points on this other then my own. But most likely that will not happen until a official release of Stockfish 4 or 3.5 or what ever the Stockfish team calls then next official version.

Let me explain something to you. Anytime someone says such and such is better or worse at this control or that control- that is another way of saying the engine in question needs a lot of work. Because the "studs" don't give a shit. They will play you at midnight in a cornfield with extension cords. At any control. To the best- all that is irrelevant bullshit.

[mwyoung]

The thread topic is Stockfish 090613 beating all Houdini versions @ 40/40, and I was expecting more than 8 games, or if 8 games, 8-0 result.

I don't know what to say to this. You did read the post, because all information is posted. And I assume you know the meaning of "all Houdini versions". 24 games have been played in my post against all Houdini versions not 8, with 50 games played.

And even the title makes no conclusions, just states the current outcome at this point in the testing. No conclusions were ever made.

Beginning a thread titled Stockfish 090613 beating all Houdini versions @ 40/40 leads people to think you are sharing a significant result.

Thanks for adding something new to the thread Adam to help Miguel. :

[mwyoung]

PS. I found the development versions of Stockfish are also weaker at short time controls, but getting better. My games are at longer time controls, the development versions of Stockfish were doing much better then Stockfish 3 against Houdini 3. That is what got me started testing development version of stockfish at long time controls, I was curious.

They are better, and they are strong- but they are no match for Houdini 3. I am sorry- but such is life.

I don't know the if you are correct or not, since no one has tested them yet that I know of at longer time controls. I will let the results speak for themselves.

That is why as chess engine testers, we test, and share our results. Would love to see more data points on this other then my own. But most likely that will not happen until a official release of Stockfish 4 or 3.5 or what ever the Stockfish team calls then next official version.

Let me explain something to you. Anytime someone says such and such is better or worse at this control or that control- that is another way of saying the engine in question needs a lot of work. Because the "studs" don't give a shit. They will play you at midnight in a cornfield with extension cords. At any control. To the best- all that is irrelevant bullshit.

You know me here, I question everything when it to chess assumptions. It is my time to waste.

Lets see what the results tell us. The conclusions will be made by Bayeselo not by me.

[Adam Hair]

The thread topic is Stockfish 090613 beating all Houdini versions @ 40/40, and I was expecting more than 8 games, or if 8 games, 8-0 result.

I don't know what to say to this. You did read the post, because all information is posted. And I assume you know the meaning of "all Houdini versions". 24 games have been played in my post against all Houdini versions not 8, with 50 games played.

And even the title makes no conclusions, just states the current outcome at this point in the testing. No conclusions were ever made.

Beginning a thread titled Stockfish 090613 beating all Houdini versions @ 40/40 leads people to think you are sharing a significant result.

Thanks for adding something new to the thread Adam to help Miguel. :

I was actually backing up a point that Kai made.