Stockfish 281213 Vs Houdini 4 pro x64A

[mwyoung]

I was able to run a quick 1+1 match yesterday. Again even with only 135 games there is high confidence because of its performance. That this version of Stockfish is stronger at blitz then Houdini 4. This is the only test I will run, new version out again today.


Stockfish 281213 Vs Houdini 4 99.7% -> [+2 , +133]

Code: Select all

Blitz, Blitz 1m+1s  0

                                      
1   Stockfish 281213 64 SSE4.2   +52  +39/=77/-19 57.41%   77.5/135
2   Houdini 4 Pro x64A           -52  +19/=77/-39 42.59%   57.5/135

[ouachita]

Proceed with caution my friend as the many daily reports of H4's death have thus far been greatly exaggerated.

[mwyoung]

Proceed with caution my friend as the many daily reports of H4's death have thus far been greatly exaggerated.

Exaggerated how, we have many 100's of games showing the same results.

The results speak for themselves, do you have data showing the latest Stockfish version are weaker then Houdini 4. I have not seen it.

Proceed with caution??, Run the test, let the data speak for itself. The stats say Stockfish is now stronger.

Below is the one telling me Stockfish is now stronger. I would complain to Remi.

http://remi.coulom.free.fr/Bayesian-Elo/

[ouachita]

I would complain to Remi.

Not complaining, but rather observing.

[mwyoung]

I would complain to Remi.

Not complaining, but rather observing.

What are you observing.

That I post results of test matches I run to test chess programs. If you don't like tournaments and match results.

I suggest you don't hang out in the Tournaments and Matches forum. Then you want have problems with observing the results.

I could be wrong, but it seem you don't like observing Stockfish vs. Houdini results because of the results.

All I can say is I will " Proceed " with more testing regardless of the results that some may or may not like.

If anyone thinks my results are in error. Stockfish is a free program and anyone can test it for themselves.

Here is the link

http://abrok.eu/stockfish/

[ouachita]

I could be wrong, but it seem you don't like observing Stockfish vs. Houdini results because of the results.

As I have posted more than once here, I have no dog in the fight (SF v. H v. K). I am simply seeking the best for my play.

In terms of "results", this and other sites are chocked full of results, mostly STC, and often conflicting and ever changing, which you and I have agreed should be analyzed and judged on their own merits. If someone is biased toward an engine, it's not difficult to find a test result to support their opinion.

As far as I know, the largest independent tester, CCRL, still has H as #1 from 1+1 to 40/40, but I could be wrong (also not 100% certain CCRL is the largest).

[mwyoung]

I could be wrong, but it seem you don't like observing Stockfish vs. Houdini results because of the results.

As I have posted more than once here, I have no dog in the fight (SF v. H v. K). I am simply seeking the best for my play.

In terms of "results", this and other sites are chocked full of results, mostly STC, and often conflicting and ever changing, which you and I have agreed should be analyzed and judged on their own merits. If someone is biased toward an engine, it's not difficult to find a test result to support their opinion.

As far as I know, the largest independent tester, CCRL, still has H as #1 from 1+1 to 40/40, but I could be wrong (also not 100% certain CCRL is the largest).

You should go with what ever testers you like.

And the only reason why CCRL still has Houdini #1 is because are they are slower at getting out results for the strongest programs then I am. And they always have been.

CCRL results do not contradict my results at all, because they have only tested and posted stockfish DD results.

And CCRL test 40/4 and 40/40.

Again I don't understand your post, you told me to "proceed with caution". Why? I have been testing programs longer them most here, longer then CCRL, and longer then CCC has been here. I don't see a reason not to test Stockfish or post the results.

So you need to explain your comments. I don't know what you mean by "proceed with caution" or your "exaggerated" comment, I don't understand what you are asking of me.

[ouachita]

Mark,
You've misinterpreted my posts.

My exaggerated comment was a knockoff of a Samuel Clemens quote.

I'm not asking anything of you. Keep doing whatever you've been doing. I and others will give your tests and others' tests the appropriate weight.

[mwyoung]

Mark,
You've misinterpreted my posts.

My exaggerated comment was a knockoff of a Samuel Clemens quote.

I'm not asking anything of you. Keep doing whatever you've been doing. I and others will give your tests and others' tests the appropriate weight.

Ok you say I misinterpreted your posts. But understand why, every post in this thread has you trying to refute my Stockfish results playing Houdini in some way. When you say "I have no dog in the fight"

"Proceed with caution"
"many daily reports of H4's death have thus far been greatly exaggerated."
"As far as I know, the largest independent tester, CCRL, still has H as #1 from 1+1 to 40/40"
"I and others will give your tests and others' tests the appropriate weight."

So sorry for the misinterpretation.

[ouachita]

I've got it: you have high confidence that Stockfish 281213 is stronger at blitz then Houdini 4. so be it.