TEST position TCEC5- Houdini 1.03a-DRybka4 1-0

[ernest]

These are a few quotes from Robert Houdart,

Thanks for the report, Martin!
version 1.03a to 1.5 that's quite a jump...

By the way, why did you include the feeble Arasan in your current tournament?

[Graham Banks]

These are a few quotes from Robert Houdart,

Thanks for the report, Martin!
version 1.03a to 1.5 that's quite a jump...

By the way, why did you include the feeble Arasan in your current tournament?

Arasan should be well outclassed, but at least it's original.

[M ANSARI]

The settings might have affected Rybka, but if you look at a bunch of Rybka 4 losses, you will find that many of them are due to not giving a drop in evaluation for blocked bishops or "bad" bishops. As for Ivanhoe and Houdini evaluating differently than Rybka ... they simply don't and evaluate almost identical to Rybka 3. Of course they have some changes and modifications, but essentially they are all based on Rybka 3 with some improvements and bug fixes. The biggest difference I can see is that they are thread based engines rather than process based.

[zullil]

Houdini is so damn strong.

Can't wait for the next version to come out.

These are a few quotes from Robert Houdart, from the chat in chessbomb during TCEC Tournament 5:

RHoudini: @Lonkosi: Houdini 1.5 will be released before the end of the year

RHoudini: Hi there, the next Houdini release will be Windows-only, no plans for a Mac version

RHoudini: @kazi92: yes, next Houdini will have tablebase support; more details later

And will the source code be released? I wonder why not.

[Jeroen]

as will be obvious to anyone watching Rybka play vs Houdini, their styles of play are very different, their evaluations are different, their main lines are very different, and their overall strenghts and weaknesses are very different.

This is the most funny comment I have been reading since a while. You must believe in fairy tales

[De Vos W]

as will be obvious to anyone watching Rybka play vs Houdini, their styles of play are very different, their evaluations are different, their main lines are very different, and their overall strenghts and weaknesses are very different.

This is the most funny comment I have been reading since a while. You must believe in fairy tales

My understanding is that Rybka was once largely a derivative of Fruit,
do i believe in fairy tales?
Who is to say which techniques, ideas, lines of code, belong to particular programmers? Who decides who owns particular bits of intellectual property and for how long? Who decides what is in public domain and what isn't?

[De Vos W]

The settings might have affected Rybka, but if you look at a bunch of Rybka 4 losses, you will find that many of them are due to not giving a drop in evaluation for blocked bishops or "bad" bishops. As for Ivanhoe and Houdini evaluating differently than Rybka ... they simply don't and evaluate almost identical to Rybka 3. Of course they have some changes and modifications, but essentially they are all based on Rybka 3 with some improvements and bug fixes. The biggest difference I can see is that they are thread based engines rather than process based.

My understanding is that Rybka was once largely a derivative of Fruit,
but who is to say which techniques, ideas, lines of code, belong to particular programmers? Who decides who owns particular bits of intellectual property and for how long? Who decides what is in public domain and what isn't?

[De Vos W]

These are a few quotes from Robert Houdart,

Thanks for the report, Martin!
version 1.03a to 1.5 that's quite a jump...

By the way, why did you include the feeble Arasan in your current tournament?

Arasan should be well outclassed, but at least it's original.

What is original? How do you know that? Are you a programmer?
Who is to say which techniques, ideas, lines of code, belong to particular programmers? Who decides who owns particular bits of intellectual property and for how long? Who decides what is in public domain and what isn't?

[Jeroen]

Apparently you are a very angry man, having no problems with Rybka derivatives (even promoting them), which are 90% more closer to Rybka than Rybka to Fruit

In the mean time your posting is completely missing my point, which was to answer mr Houdarts claim that Houdini is playing completely different compared to Rybka. For me that is the joke of the year!

[Houdini]

This is the most funny comment I have been reading since a while. You must believe in fairy tales

Jeroen,

Look at the very fine game of chess presented by Bram. Compare the evaluations and the ponder moves. Consider whether Rybka has correctly evaluated the trapped bishop, and whether Houdini has done so.

Curiously, over the last 18 months you have made exactly 4 posts at Talkchess, and every time your *only* goal appeared to be to denigrate Houdini or other competitors of Rybka.
Surely a prominent member of the Rybka team can make better contributions to Talkchess than just trash-talking Houdini.

Robert