Komodo 4 on long time control

[lkaufman]

[quote="mwyoung
Larry the problem is no one cares about that issue but maybe 20 people on CCC. You are a GM, and must know GM players, and I have been around many GM players being a member of the St. Louis Chess Club. So you must know what I know.

The chess pros love Houdini, and I have talked with them about the Rybka, and IPPO isssue. And they think you guys are a joke. One GM made the comment "Who do they think they are the computer fide or something."

I have never seen GM's promote a program like Houdini, GM Yasser Seirawan at the club talked about Houdini all the time. I thought Robert was paying him. GM Yasser Seirawan even promotes Houdini on ICC broadcast.

Larry it is hard to beat good word of mouth.[/quote]

Well I'm not denying that Houdini is the best program available to the general public today, especially since Komodo MP is not even out yet. I even quote Houdini from time to time in my new opening book - basically I did all the deep analysis for it with Komodo but used Houdini on 8 cores when actually writing the articles, as for instant feedback Komodo SP was of course not a sensible option. I'm merely explaining why we are extra-motivated to surpass Houdini, and why I feel that most of the credit for it belongs to the unknown Commies who wrote Ippo and to Vas Rajlich. I don't expect these issues to be of interest to the chess playing community, only to people who read forums like this one.

[mwyoung]

[quote="mwyoung
Larry the problem is no one cares about that issue but maybe 20 people on CCC. You are a GM, and must know GM players, and I have been around many GM players being a member of the St. Louis Chess Club. So you must know what I know.

The chess pros love Houdini, and I have talked with them about the Rybka, and IPPO isssue. And they think you guys are a joke. One GM made the comment "Who do they think they are the computer fide or something."

I have never seen GM's promote a program like Houdini, GM Yasser Seirawan at the club talked about Houdini all the time. I thought Robert was paying him. GM Yasser Seirawan even promotes Houdini on ICC broadcast.

Larry it is hard to beat good word of mouth.

Well I'm not denying that Houdini is the best program available to the general public today, especially since Komodo MP is not even out yet. I even quote Houdini from time to time in my new opening book - basically I did all the deep analysis for it with Komodo but used Houdini on 8 cores when actually writing the articles, as for instant feedback Komodo SP was of course not a sensible option. I'm merely explaining why we are extra-motivated to surpass Houdini, and why I feel that most of the credit for it belongs to the unknown Commies who wrote Ippo and to Vas Rajlich. I don't expect these issues to be of interest to the chess playing community, only to people who read forums like this one.[/quote]

Larry I have very high level of respect for you. I guess the point I am trying to make. When you think you can demand for a competitor answers that you have no right to demand. It looks bad, and petty. And the trash talk does not help, that looks like more sour grapes.

Right or Wrong that what people see.

To be blunt, If a competitor of mine started demanding me to answer his question about my legal bussiness. I would not have been as nice as Robert. I would tell you to go... Robert owes no one any answers, he did not sign any papers saying his program was X like Rybka and then played in the WCCC. No one has come forward with standing against Robert or Houdini and that is the facts, end of story.

If you want to beat Houdini do it by besting his program, and his customer service. That is why people like Houdini.

[tomgdrums]

[quote="mwyoung
Larry the problem is no one cares about that issue but maybe 20 people on CCC. You are a GM, and must know GM players, and I have been around many GM players being a member of the St. Louis Chess Club. So you must know what I know.

The chess pros love Houdini, and I have talked with them about the Rybka, and IPPO isssue. And they think you guys are a joke. One GM made the comment "Who do they think they are the computer fide or something."

I have never seen GM's promote a program like Houdini, GM Yasser Seirawan at the club talked about Houdini all the time. I thought Robert was paying him. GM Yasser Seirawan even promotes Houdini on ICC broadcast.

Larry it is hard to beat good word of mouth.

Well I'm not denying that Houdini is the best program available to the general public today, especially since Komodo MP is not even out yet. I even quote Houdini from time to time in my new opening book - basically I did all the deep analysis for it with Komodo but used Houdini on 8 cores when actually writing the articles, as for instant feedback Komodo SP was of course not a sensible option. I'm merely explaining why we are extra-motivated to surpass Houdini, and why I feel that most of the credit for it belongs to the unknown Commies who wrote Ippo and to Vas Rajlich. I don't expect these issues to be of interest to the chess playing community, only to people who read forums like this one.

Larry I have very high level of respect for you. I guess the point I am trying to make. When you think you can demand for a competitor answers that you have no right to demand. It looks bad, and petty. And the trash talk does not help, that looks like more sour grapes.

Right or Wrong that what people see.

To be blunt, If a competitor of mine started demanding me to answer his question about my legal bussiness. I would not have been as nice as Robert. I would tell you to go... Robert owes no one any answers, he did not sign any papers saying his program was X like Rybka and then played in the WCCC. No one has come forward with standing against Robert or Houdini and that is the facts, end of story.

If you want to beat Houdini do it by besting his program, and his customer service. That is why people like Houdini.[/quote]

+50!!

[lkaufman]

Larry I have very high level of respect for you. I guess the point I am trying to make. When you think you can demand for a competitor answers that you have no right to demand. It looks bad, and petty. And the trash talk does not help, that looks like more sour grapes.

Right or Wrong that what people see.

To be blunt, If a competitor of mine started demanding me to answer his question about my legal bussiness. I would not have been as nice as Robert. I would tell you to go... Robert owes no one any answers, he did not sign any papers saying his program was X like Rybka and then played in the WCCC. No one has come forward with standing against Robert or Houdini and that is the facts, end of story.

If you want to beat Houdini do it by besting his program, and his customer service. That is why people like Houdini.

Well, we intend to do just that. I only ask that our future releases be judged relative to Houdini by performance at the longest time controls in regular use by the testers (i.e. 40/20 or 40/40). I like Houdini too, I just don't like the "author", because when Houdini first came out he presented it as a new program he wrote, which was a complete fabrication as it was 99% identical to Ippo or Ivanhoe.

[mwyoung]

Larry I have very high level of respect for you. I guess the point I am trying to make. When you think you can demand for a competitor answers that you have no right to demand. It looks bad, and petty. And the trash talk does not help, that looks like more sour grapes.

Right or Wrong that what people see.

To be blunt, If a competitor of mine started demanding me to answer his question about my legal bussiness. I would not have been as nice as Robert. I would tell you to go... Robert owes no one any answers, he did not sign any papers saying his program was X like Rybka and then played in the WCCC. No one has come forward with standing against Robert or Houdini and that is the facts, end of story.

If you want to beat Houdini do it by besting his program, and his customer service. That is why people like Houdini.

Well, we intend to do just that. I only ask that our future releases be judged relative to Houdini by performance at the longest time controls in regular use by the testers (i.e. 40/20 or 40/40). I like Houdini too, I just don't like the "author", because when Houdini first came out he presented it as a new program he wrote, which was a complete fabrication as it was 99% identical to Ippo or Ivanhoe.

Larry I wish you the best...

In regards to testing at fast time controls. I don't see that happening, CCRL, IPON, CEGT and almost everyone else will test at fast time controls.

Komodo will have to take its chances in fast as well as slower game. As the saying goes. It is what it is.....

If Komodo tops Houdini at any time controls, it will have an positive impact for you....

As a customer I will always favor slower game results to faster game results. You should set up a poll question in this regard, some my favor faster test results. I know many player that move through their games very fast, and let the program see each position for only a few seconds.

[lkaufman]

Larry I wish you the best...

In regards to testing at fast time controls. I don't see that happening, CCRL, IPON, CEGT and almost everyone else will test at fast time controls.

Komodo will have to take its chances in fast as well as slower game. As the saying goes. It is what it is.....

If Komodo tops Houdini at any time controls, it will have an positive impact for you....

As a customer I will always favor slower game results to faster game results. You should set up a poll question in this regard, some my favor faster test results. I know many player that move through their very fast, and let the program see each position for only a few seconds.

I'm not asking the testing organizations to do anything differently. I'm just hoping that most people will do what you say you will do, namely favor the slower game results. I realize that for some people blitz strength is important, while for others play at longer time controls is more relevant. I could take a poll, but the results wouldn't help us. It's not like we could just decide tomorrow to be relatively stronger in blitz and weaker at long time controls. I'm just predicting that we will pass Houdini at the longer time controls soon, but it will take some time to pass Houdini in blitz, and probably by then Rybka 5 will be the program to beat.

[Uri Blass]

[
Don and Larry needs to meet one of their deadlines and release Komodo 4 for testing.

All they are waiting for is a version of Komodo 4 that can overtake Houdini in the rating lists. With all the trash talk from them about Houdini's problems. Why the delay?

Basically, our problem is that we have two simultaneous projects going on. One is to come out with an MP version of Komodo as of the date code was frozen for it, and the other is the continued improvement of the SP version, which will eventually migrate to the MP.

I can propose an experiment you or anyone else out there with some good hardware can do. Run a long match of Komodo 3 64-bit SSE against Houdini (1.5 or 2.0, take your pick) 32-bit at some fairly long time control, maybe something like 25 minutes plus 15 seconds increment (i.e. five times what IPON uses), preferably with Ponder off so you can run twice as many games at once. The point is that our latest Komodo version is roughly improved over Komodo 3 by the same amount that Houdini 64-bit outrates Houdini 32-bit. So whatever the result of such a match might be (I haven't run it so I don't know), it should be a good predictor for how our latest version will do against Houdini 64 bit at whatever time control you use. I know that Houdini 32-bit kills Komodo 3 64 bit at bullet chess (1' per game or anything comparably fast), so my expectation of a close result at long time controls rests squarely on my belief that Komodo scales much better than Houdini. I hope someone runs this test and posts the results here. But please, we need a few hundred games, not 50 or so. Of course if several people each run 50, that works fine!

Running a match now. With 5/6 TC. Perfect 12 abk. both engines.
Houdini 1.5 w32. vs. Komodo 3 -32. result so far. 9-0-9.
Houdini is killing Komodo after 18 games. Komodo has not won one game yet.

Best,
Gerold.

I understood Komodo 3 64 bit SSE - Houdini 1.5a 32 bit.

Of course and also long time control.
You are free not to do it but if you respond to Larry who asked to do testing of Komodo3 64 bit SSE against Houdini 1.5a 32 bit at long time control then I do not see the point of giving blitz results with komodo 32 bits.

[gerold]

[
Don and Larry needs to meet one of their deadlines and release Komodo 4 for testing.

All they are waiting for is a version of Komodo 4 that can overtake Houdini in the rating lists. With all the trash talk from them about Houdini's problems. Why the delay?

Basically, our problem is that we have two simultaneous projects going on. One is to come out with an MP version of Komodo as of the date code was frozen for it, and the other is the continued improvement of the SP version, which will eventually migrate to the MP.

I can propose an experiment you or anyone else out there with some good hardware can do. Run a long match of Komodo 3 64-bit SSE against Houdini (1.5 or 2.0, take your pick) 32-bit at some fairly long time control, maybe something like 25 minutes plus 15 seconds increment (i.e. five times what IPON uses), preferably with Ponder off so you can run twice as many games at once. The point is that our latest Komodo version is roughly improved over Komodo 3 by the same amount that Houdini 64-bit outrates Houdini 32-bit. So whatever the result of such a match might be (I haven't run it so I don't know), it should be a good predictor for how our latest version will do against Houdini 64 bit at whatever time control you use. I know that Houdini 32-bit kills Komodo 3 64 bit at bullet chess (1' per game or anything comparably fast), so my expectation of a close result at long time controls rests squarely on my belief that Komodo scales much better than Houdini. I hope someone runs this test and posts the results here. But please, we need a few hundred games, not 50 or so. Of course if several people each run 50, that works fine!

Running a match now. With 5/6 TC. Perfect 12 abk. both engines.
Houdini 1.5 w32. vs. Komodo 3 -32. result so far. 9-0-9.
Houdini is killing Komodo after 18 games. Komodo has not won one game yet.

Best,
Gerold.

I understood Komodo 3 64 bit SSE - Houdini 1.5a 32 bit.

Of course and also long time control.
You are free not to do it but if you respond to Larry who asked to do testing of Komodo3 64 bit SSE against Houdini 1.5a 32 bit at long time control then I do not see the point of giving blitz results with komodo 32 bits.

I was going to run 100 plus games but since no one wants them run at blitz i stopped at 30 games. Komodo 3 won one game out of 30 played. Looks like Komodo needs a little more work.

Best,
Gerold.

[Albert Silver]

I have never seen GM's promote a program like Houdini, GM Yasser Seirawan at the club talked about Houdini all the time. I thought Robert was paying him. GM Yasser Seirawan even promotes Houdini on ICC broadcast.

You must have missed the Rybka craze. For years, all the GMs ever talked about was Rybka. It was Rybka this and Rybka that. In an interview by Gustafsson in New In Chess, when asked who was the player he admired the most, he replied "Rybka".

Every top engine has had this. Bareev in the 90s described his openings work as take a position, run Fritz, which was king-of-the-hill at the time, and wait for it to come up with something new.

I don't agree, I have been around computer chess since the early 80's. I have never seen an explosion like Houdini. Back in the 90's many players still had a hatred for computer chess products. They thought they were a joke.

Rybka dates from December 2005.

Never in the history of computer chess has a chess program been so strong (#1 by a wide margin).

Your memory is highly selective.

Rybka 3 had a much larger edge over the next non-Rybka by at least the DOUBLE of what Houdini 1.5a had when it first came out.

In fact even Fritz 5, when it was first tested by SSDF, was over 70 Elo ahead of the next best engine in the first list it appeared in. My memory is a bit sketchy as to which engine was second but offhand I think it was Rebel 8.

Albert I am not interested in your Chessbase bias.

Yes, this Chessbase bias of mine is terrible. I have been writing tournament reports and whatnot for what? 18 months? And I've been a CCC member for what? Over 15 years? In fact I am the one who got Rybka for Convekta, even though I was no longer working for them.

However, worry not, I will no longer bother you with replies.

[lkaufman]

[
Don and Larry needs to meet one of their deadlines and release Komodo 4 for testing.

All they are waiting for is a version of Komodo 4 that can overtake Houdini in the rating lists. With all the trash talk from them about Houdini's problems. Why the delay?

Basically, our problem is that we have two simultaneous projects going on. One is to come out with an MP version of Komodo as of the date code was frozen for it, and the other is the continued improvement of the SP version, which will eventually migrate to the MP.

I can propose an experiment you or anyone else out there with some good hardware can do. Run a long match of Komodo 3 64-bit SSE against Houdini (1.5 or 2.0, take your pick) 32-bit at some fairly long time control, maybe something like 25 minutes plus 15 seconds increment (i.e. five times what IPON uses), preferably with Ponder off so you can run twice as many at once. The point is that our latest Komodo version is roughly improved over Komodo 3 by the same amount that Houdini 64-bit outrates Houdini 32-bit. So whatever the result of such a match might be (I haven't run it so I don't know), it should be a good predictor for how our latest version will do against Houdini 64 bit at whatever time control you use. I know that Houdini 32-bit kills Komodo 3 64 bit at bullet chess (1' per game or anything comparably fast), so my expectation of a close result at long time controls rests squarely on my belief that Komodo scales much better than Houdini. I hope someone runs this test and posts the results here. But please, we need a few hundred games, not 50 or so. Of course if several people each run 50, that works fine!

Running a match now. With 5/6 TC. Perfect 12 abk. both engines.
Houdini 1.5 w32. vs. Komodo 3 -32. result so far. 9-0-9.
Houdini is killing Komodo after 18 games. Komodo has not won one game yet.

Best,
Gerold.

I understood Komodo 3 64 bit SSE - Houdini 1.5a 32 bit.

Of course and also long time control.
You are free not to do it but if you respond to Larry who asked to do testing of Komodo3 64 bit SSE against Houdini 1.5a 32 bit at long time control then I do not see the point of giving blitz results with komodo 32 bits.

I was going to run 100 plus games but since no one wants them run at blitz i stopped at 30 games. Komodo 3 won one game out of 30 played. Looks like Komodo needs a little more work.

Best,
Gerold.

You missed the whole point. We know that Komodo 3 32 bit is relatively very weak, just look at the rating lists. It is the product of a few minutes' work, we gave it zero priority (that may change in the future). The point was to use Komodo 64 bit as running Houdini 32 bit handicaps it by about the amount we have improved Komodo by since Komodo 3. That will tell you roughly where we stand right now. We'll still lose at blitz I think, though narrowly, but at something like the suggested 25' + 15" we might well come out ahead in a long match. Anyway I'd like to know.