Why Is Houdini Not Entered In The WCCC??

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

...What makes you feel your verdict would be generally accepted ?
Matthias.

Then let the person be Matthias Gemuh. But you have to keep the promise. Can you?

Rasjid

Nobody would change his/her belief because of my assessment.

Matthias.

I will

[Sean Evans]

What Robert is going to do and why he is not releasing the code now, is he has to modify it enough to confuse people as to the program he cloned. Add a bit, delete a bit, toss in a little fairy dust and "Poof" now he can claim an original program. Houdini is and will always be a clone of a clone that was modified by Robert.

Mystery solved

Sean

[Robert Houdart]

Sean, thank you for further demonstrating your dogmatic attitude, it's the perfect endpoint for this topic.

Robert

[Charles]

Robert you certainly did a fine job with Houdini..It is very strong and is beating Rybka 4 on my machine -

What I don't understand is why not make the simple statement:

I took the ippolit sources, studied them, and made changes to produce what we have now.






Is there anything wrong with saying that? Isn't that a bit more honest? Are you claiming that there is absolutely no identical code between ippolit and houdini, and/or that houdini is not derived from ippolit at all?

[Robert Houdart]

What I don't understand is why not make the simple statement:

I took the ippolit sources, studied them, and made changes to produce what we have now.

Because the simple fact is that this is not an accurate description of how Houdini was created.

What I don't understand is why you insist on my making a false statement.
The word "Inquisition" comes to mind, I'm really glad we no longer live in 16th century...

Robert

[Chan Rasjid]

Robert Houdart said "...Houdini is all my development...". There should not be any doubt about the usual interpretation of the statement - that it is an original work written from scratch without any cut-and-paste from any illegitimate sources (here usually mean Ipp*).

It is not unusual that a person write an "original" program with the strength of Houdini - there is nothing more really original after the Ippo* codes was released . Just as Osipov Yuri rewrote Fruit in bitboard, a person also could "rewrite" Ippo* cloning most of search and evaluation to start with. Such a program is, in some consideration, completely original. If I were to write a commercial chess engine for money, this is how I would start.

Rasjid.

[Charles]

What I don't understand is why not make the simple statement:

I took the ippolit sources, studied them, and made changes to produce what we have now.

Because the simple fact is that this is not an accurate description of how Houdini was created.

What I don't understand is why you insist on my making a false statement.
The word "Inquisition" comes to mind, I'm really glad we no longer live in 16th century...

Robert

Nonsense this is not an inquisition merely a request for the truth.

Is this you statement then:
Houdini is all my development, and I've always given due credit in the readme file, on the web site, and in the various forums. ?

Because that implies to me that you designed Houdini from the ground up, and only absorbing ideas from ippolit and others.

That would also imply that there is no (or very little) identical code ...

Would you agree with my above conclusions from your earlier statement?

[Robert Houdart]

Because that implies to me that you designed Houdini from the ground up, and only absorbing ideas from ippolit and others.

Exact, I have never claimed otherwise.
As a matter of fact, Houdini would have been written in Delphi (Object Pascal) if it weren't for the lack of a 64-bit Delphi compiler until next year. I'm a far greater Delphi expert than C++ expert.

Also Rasjid's previous post is quite accurate.

Robert

[Peter C]

You don't have to publish the whole source. Just small parts of it.

Which part would you want to see? (that is meant as a serious and sincere question)
I'm a bit skeptical and wonder what could possibly convince some people who apparently don't believe a single word I say (just reread this thread to get the mood...). For every bit of code I show they can and probably will claim that I didn't provide any evidence that it is part of Houdini...

Robert

I'm not a chess engine expert (I hardly even know C/C++), but I'd like to see the eval, as it's quite different from Ippo*'s eval. I want to know if you just do some math on it to make it more pessimistic like a lot of people think, or if it really is different.

Peter

[BTO7]

What Robert is going to do and why he is not releasing the code now, is he has to modify it enough to confuse people as to the program he cloned. Add a bit, delete a bit, toss in a little fairy dust and "Poof" now he can claim an original program. Houdini is and will always be a clone of a clone that was modified by Robert.

Mystery solved

Sean

You sound like your directly with the Angels camp ...proly me4you from over there with this idiotic push to find out something you cant have ....just like they do ...so you attack ...just like they do ...so you can try to get some info....bottom line what does it matter ??? Thought so ...doesnt matter at all. Do you even have a point in any of this ??? Didnt think so ...go play with the girls fake lol. Robert has the best engine ....and you dont get to see LOL ....get over it. You guys over there really need a life.

BT