Laskos wrote:Do you know what it means to assimilate knowledge in sciences? If you don't, what I meant is that each one of those famed authors should have got quickly the ideas behind the code, and without breaking any rules, use the open source engines to increase the strength of their own engines. These famed professionals failed on all the occasions.
If you still don't understand how professional science works, go to college. Or you are just nitpicking here, defending the incompetent, to say the least, authors of Fritz, Junior, Hiarcs and Shredder?
Kai
Both, Hiarcs and Shredder, where the No. 1 Engines for years. I think one shouldn't call them idiots. I don't know about Marc Uniacke but SMK said he looks of course into sources of the strong open source engines and uses their ideas. Thats the point, he uses ideas and not the whole program. So he does exactly what you want. He decided to go on with Shredder instead of creatzing and selling another Ippo clone. Thats fine and honorable IMHO.
You really are very badly informed. See for example your other thread about the GPL stuff, it's really amazing.
As for your last remark, the funny thing is that you don't have the latest versions of Houdini either. Yet you feel fully qualified to make a claim about the relative strengths of these 3 engines...
Are you running a rating list or a Komodo/Thinker fan club?
Hello Robert,
and now?
GPL information are right!
I think you have with IPON and Ingo Bauer your fan club. With all power he try to defend you (GPL thread).
Give it up Robert, you are using GPL sources 1:1 for a commercial development. I can't believe the Sergei and Victor know that. It would be better you informed Chess OK about it.
Perhaps in cases of a question about advertising, it should go to the moderators to decide if to warn, delete or ban etc.
I don't think it is of computer chess playing interest.
Me too, maybe i also could have reported to the moderators that it disturbs me to see these arguments and rivalry in this forum.
Laskos wrote:Do you know what it means to assimilate knowledge in sciences? If you don't, what I meant is that each one of those famed authors should have got quickly the ideas behind the code, and without breaking any rules, use the open source engines to increase the strength of their own engines. These famed professionals failed on all the occasions.
If you still don't understand how professional science works, go to college. Or you are just nitpicking here, defending the incompetent, to say the least, authors of Fritz, Junior, Hiarcs and Shredder?
Kai
Both, Hiarcs and Shredder, where the No. 1 Engines for years. I think one shouldn't call them idiots. I don't know about Marc Uniacke but SMK said he looks of course into sources of the strong open source engines and uses their ideas. Thats the point, he uses ideas and not the whole program. So he does exactly what you want. He decided to go on with Shredder instead of creatzing and selling another Ippo clone. Thats fine and honorable IMHO.
I prefer an original Shredder.
Judging by Shredder's progress with regard to strength, I was thinking that SMK is just lazy, and never had a look even at Strelka. Now you are clearly implying that he is at least incompetent, a professional CC engine author which is unable to apply successfully new ideas developed even by amateurs (and available as open source). I am very disappointed by your revelation, as I myself like both Shredder engine and GUI.
Frank Quisinsky wrote:
It seems you are one of the users which are able to looked in detail. I have the same opinion. With more hardware power the engines lost playing strength.
Hi Frank,
thanks for your kind comment.
Analysing my Correspondence games, which often involves letting engines running over night while i'm asleep, i noticed that Houdini, or IvanHoe/Ippolit which i used formerly till the best optimized Ippolit with Houdini 1.5a got known, that they get pretty stubbornly in the depths around 30... it calculates for hours (which is expected, as each new depth should be around a power of 2 to the previous one) but starts printing the same lines/evals, just minorly modified in the deepest moves... while engines like Rybka 3 or 4.1 (where you have to subtract a few depth-levels depending on the type of the position) are still able the improve the whole tree... if you then select the Houdini-move and the best answer it found to it, even in the second move of your side (=the third overall) you can sometimes find serious improvements when looking with a higher Multi-PV... and this way beyond depth30 you used to find the first move... maybe just depth23 on the +2move (so overall depth25 when seeing it from the point of the first move) for Houdini to realize that there are way better second-moves that it originally found in depth30-analysis... to me an indication of high (and too agressive) pruning which make the engine excel in all this "kiddy"-ratinglists, but pretty normal/on-par with Rybka and others for serious (Correspondence) use... Houdini often neglects its losing (printing the familiar ~ +/-0.00s), its relative weak understanding pawn-chains&-formations and overpushes pawns often massively, the queen-value is overvaluated compared to rooks and pieces (and sadly it can't be changed) and it is very addicted to push serious advantages away into high-level-eval-draws... maybe RH will provide us a less-pruning version for serious analysis some day...
Wishing you a great week and good luck for your new homepage-project,
That roughly equates to the ICC rating difference between the engines. I'm not saying that Houdini isn't stronger than Komodo. I'm saying that when using them online, the rating difference between the two was small. +/- 70 rating points on ICC isn't a lot of difference.
Peter
I was kicked out of Chapters because I moved all the Bibles to the fiction section.
Laskos wrote:Do you know what it means to assimilate knowledge in sciences? If you don't, what I meant is that each one of those famed authors should have got quickly the ideas behind the code, and without breaking any rules, use the open source engines to increase the strength of their own engines. These famed professionals failed on all the occasions.
If you still don't understand how professional science works, go to college. Or you are just nitpicking here, defending the incompetent, to say the least, authors of Fritz, Junior, Hiarcs and Shredder?
Kai
Both, Hiarcs and Shredder, where the No. 1 Engines for years. I think one shouldn't call them idiots. I don't know about Marc Uniacke but SMK said he looks of course into sources of the strong open source engines and uses their ideas. Thats the point, he uses ideas and not the whole program. So he does exactly what you want. He decided to go on with Shredder instead of creatzing and selling another Ippo clone. Thats fine and honorable IMHO.
I prefer an original Shredder.
No, maybe they're all just a bunch of crooks! Question is, where did the first crook take his ideas from!
