Uri Blass wrote:If we talk about blitz 40/4 than houdini2c is probably slightly stronger than houdini1.5a based on the CEGT listgeots wrote:Uri Blass wrote:I think that it is not very interesting testing rainbow against a weak version of houdini
1.5 seems to be better than 2c when we do not talk about blitz and I did not buy 2c exactly for the reason that I saw no convincing evidence that it is stronger than the free version 1.5 .
From the CEGT 40/20 rating list
1 Houdini 1.5a x64 1CPU 3013 14 14 1698 68.6% 2877
2 Houdini 2.0c x64 1CPU 3002 15 15 1293 63.1% 2909
From the CCRL 40/40 rating list
Houdini 1.5a 64-bit 3156 +17 −17 64.1% −93.3 42.4% 1169
Houdini 2.0c 64-bit 3144 +16 −16 67.3% −121.8 36.2% 1334
If you use houdini2 than houdini2s is significantly stronger than 2c if to believe other people and I do not have houdini2(maybe not at very fast time control that Robebrt houdart tests but at longer time control).
The results between 2s and 2c at blitz 5+3 after 1001 games are
+318,=473,-210 for 2s so I guess it is better to stop to test 2c and start to test 2s.
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=25226
Strange. Based on the fact that CCRL 40/40 in 1cpu says that Komodo 3 64bit is stronger than Critter 1.4 64bit I would have to do my own testing there. And that is version 3!. A typo or testing error? So don't assume that any rating list is foolproof. (I did not say it is written in stone CCRL is wrong about K3 and Critter 1.4. Just that those results seem so screwy to me, that if cared, I would have to run my own tests.)
Secondly, I cannot help where you got your info- but if it shows that Houdini 2.0c is weaker at blitz than 1.5a- your info is all bad. I really think your first mistake is judging an engine and quoting results when you have never owned it or run one game with it. That begins your problems- and they just magnify from there. Garbage in-garbage out.
gts
9 Houdini 2.0 x64 1CPU 3028 11 11 2800 73.8% 2848 31.8%
13 Houdini 1.5 x64 1CPU 3019 9 9 4950 72.3% 2853 30.3%
40/4 means 6 seconds per move
At 40/20(30 seconds per move) it seems to be the opposite
Your time control is 5+5 is in average between 6 seconds per move and 30 seconds per move so I can say that the difference between 2c and 1.5c is probably a small difference.
Note also that
2s is probably stronger than both 2c and 1.5a
Uri, what's the point. The only time, with no exceptions, that people start breaking down blitz controls or changing them: someone trying in vain to make one engine stronger than another- when it isn't. Usually it is a programmer trying to make excuses when he can't catch another engine. Have you ever noticed that Robert NEVER cares what control you run his engine in. He KNOWS he has the best. I am not going to get into a discussion any further about 1.5a and 2.0c, simply because they both belong to him. He wins either way. As for 2s, I don't know to what you refer, but if it has anything to do with a user making parameter changes to an engine- leave me out of the discussion. That to me is a useless waste of time.
You really need to argue Houdini at blitz controls with someone who has had less experience than me. There is no one alive who has run more blitz games at diff. controls, including 40/3 , etc. over the last 3 months than me. Over 5,000. And this is not any games faster than 4m+2s. So people who have run 2 minute games, 1 minute games, 30 second games cannot be compared with mine.
And if I was a programmer trying to catch Houdini, there is no way I would release a damn thing until I had a chance to see Houdini 3. If Robert says 50 to 70 elo increase- you can take it to the bank. A programmer busts his ass to finally catch 2.0c- by a few elo points- maybe. Then 2 days later he wakes up, and H3 is out, and now he is 50 or 60 elo down again. A smart programmer would wait to SEE what he was facing. Anyway:
Best,
george
I must admit you have me beat, and let me take this moment to congratulate you on the work you do.