12274 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Backgammon, Yatzy, and more!
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
This is a major innovation in the Fried Liver and is the most serious attempt at a refutation of 5...Nxd5. The idea 10
.d4 is obvious and strong; Black never equalized.
This is a major innovation in the Fried Liver and is the most serious attempt at a refutation of 5...Nxd5. The idea 10.d4 is obvious and strong; Black never equalized.
Sorry, this is just more crapola from your "Chess Krap" program. Your 10.d4 "major innovation" is completely busted by 10...Kd7 (eval of -0.62). 10...Kf7 is also good. Your "Pro's" selection of 10...Qd6 results in an eval of +0.71, which is a swing for the worse of 1.33 pawns.
If you're not going to ditch that crappy program, at least learn how to analyze your games so you can avoid spewing complete crap like this "innovation". Frankly, I've wasted far too much time poking holes in all of these bogus games. Get a real program and learn how to use it, and then I'll think about taking your posts seriously. Until then, it's "Vaya con dios."
The computer is clearly flawed in the opening; while some games are suspect when I submitted a variety of games to GM Alburt where its openings are not suspect, it plays well. Right now, when it plays something instantly, I'll have to vet the move (as I should have done here).
I've been burned by the Pro's opening book for the last time; I'll wait to post games until I find out why it constantly makes losing moves in the opening. There must be some kind of algorithm that randomly forces the pro to make its choices from a variety of legal moves.
But it begs the question---if the opening "book" of the Pro is not thorough enough to get the computer into a playable middlegame, this could indicate that opening theory will be its Achilles Heel and the Achilles Heel of all programs. Sooner or later the computer will have to leave its opening book which may cause the computer to rearrange its pieces to its "liking".
What EscherehcsE says is true, H3 never considers Qd6, it considers 10... Kf7 for one second and then change his mind to 10... Kd7 and then it keeps its opinion (until depth 20 at least) and it gives black a clear advantage.
The Pro, by coincidence played this variation with White and was clearly surprised by Kd7. I didn't realize I had set the time control to a 10 minute game until I glanced at the clock and had 8 minutes left to the computer's 3 minutes. Black had a slight advantage but hung a pawn for no compensation, but the the Pro lost on time.
BREAKING NEWS! Houdini caught cheating in nTCEC
In his last announcement, nTCEC chess engines competition’s director shocked the chess world by depriving Houdini 3 from its nTCEC crown due to cheating by using sloughterchess assistance. The director explains in details: "before the superfinal against Stockfish, Dr. Houdart asked me to modify the engine slightly to fix some bugs; I accepted that and the engine was modified. However, after the superfinal I tried to figure out the differences between the two versions only to find that the second one connects to a certain site on the internet! And after further investigations I found that site to be personal and belongs to chess.com member sloughterchess, the only human player who can beat all engines fairly easily. This made me believe that Houdini was getting help from sloughterchess throughout the superfinal, then I went on to ask Dr. Houdart about it who indeed has confirmed my suspicions and said that he paid him 1000$ for each game he helps Houdini in, and that the help was only in some critical games (Houdini won all of these). Given that sloughterchess is much stronger than Houdini this is a crystal-clear cheating case so I decided to cancel Houdini's result and declare Stockfish as the champion, and to avoid such accident, I decided to use the old version of Houdini 3 and deny the internet access in upcoming seasons"
Besides that, the second nTCEC season has just started with Stockfish looking to defend its title and Houdini trying to show that it can win even without outside help. It can be followed here:
This gets my vote for the funniest post of the month
ahahahahaha. Nice one FedTel
The opening in the above game was suggested as a true test of Houdini's ability by GM Roman Dzindzichasvili. He suggested I test both 6...e6 and 6...e5.
White had a slight plus in the middlegame, but a draw seems likely.
Neither white nor black have done correct or best moves after the opening (from move 6,indeed) therefore SHUT UP you and the GM (if he is really guilty) with all due respect. That kind of play can not be Houdini 3. They are loser' moves like you Slou...a liar psychotic loser. The entire forum laughs at you.
Houdini 3 and Houdini 3 Pro play junk in the opening so I have decided to try Rykba 4 Extreme (rated at 3150 according to the manufacturer); from my preliminary play, it plays the openings incomparably better than either Houdini's so I will use it from now on.
Yeah sure sure, so from today the new crap will be that you are able to beat Rybka 4. If not for me obviously, or for all of us, please stop it, at least for the chess' sake.
If you weren't such an idiot you'd stop posting messages.
Yes I am a huge idiot, because I am still posting messages (maybe the last one) when I know for sure that you are a crazy arrogant troll who understands nothing about the game and the world of chess as your speech and statistics show.
Yes you are the village idiot. Was it a natural tendency, did you pass a test or did you train for your idiotic rants?
For the moment it seems that Houdini 3 and Houdini 3 Pro have been created for analysis to get the very best possible move in any analyzed position, but that it was not considered needed to make the play mode take systematically the first line of Houdini 3's analysis as its move each time. As everybody seems to point out, when you play against Houdini 3 at max level and then a few minutes later analyze the game, you can see it did not play the best moves it itself recommends. That's obvious from the very first game played.
That's strange to me and so I have asked why that is, and how hard it would be to make the maximum playing mode "simply" be the first line of the analysis of each move. Of course some kind of opening has to be included to save analysis time, maybe that's the problem. Maybe it's not as simple as it sounds.
My sincerest apologies to post members; it never occurred to me that the manufacturer of Houdini 3 and the Pro would program the computer to play junk in play mode.
Houdini works well, within its inherent limitations.
I could not expect the author of Houdini to program YOU, or pretty much address every case of the PEBKAC syndrome effectively. He probably thinks that the usage manual should suffice, but alas, it does not seem being the case here...
I didn't get a manual and Houdart won't return my e-mail (well, I did ask him several off topic questions )
I feel your pain, bro. To find the online manual, I actually had to Google "Houdini chess engine manual"!
Man, am I ever exhausted! I'm going to have to take a sabbatical leave now.
P.S. Thanks pfren, I learned a new acronymn! PEBKAC!
I'm assuming that this is communication to you from a Chess King representative? The information is a bit odd, as it seems to imply that the problem originates with the Houdini engine and not the Chess King GUI. However, this might just be due to the rep's ignorance of the issues, or even willful misdirection (not wanting to 'fess up - let's just keep obfuscating the facts, etc.). I seriously doubt that the problem comes from the engine itself, unless Houdart went to the trouble of making a special Houdini version just for Chess King. (I would be surprised if he did that.)
Anyway, I would be interested in knowing the results of the investigation and how Chess King decides to resolve the problem.
Yes---this is from the Chess King representative, Diego. He also indicated surprise that when he input the Two Knights' Defense, his Houdini also played the blunder---4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.Qf3+ Ke8? so the problem does not appear restricted to my computer.
Since Houdini 3 likely does not play a perfect game, then yes I think it CAN be beaten. The real question is WILL it be beaten. My guess is it will be when Houdini 4 comes out
Or maybe when Sloughterchess 2 arrives.
Who Is The Best Players In Chess History
by KoenSchaakmans 3 minutes ago
Member Analysis Auditions
by cdowis75 4 minutes ago
Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?
by btickler 5 minutes ago
11/27/2015 - Holes and Fillings
by Random_Number 7 minutes ago
Suggestions for Online Chess Techniques
by cdowis75 17 minutes ago
Show the equipment and the place where usually play/train/study
by mcostan 20 minutes ago
by winston_weng 21 minutes ago
My Game: What Do You Think?
by wolverine96 35 minutes ago
by MSC157 39 minutes ago
HOS Ebony Dubrovnik Chessmen
by FirebrandX 41 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!