Houdini 3 Pro plays King pawn openings exclusively (so far I have played a dozen games with Black and it always chooses 1.e4 and I always respond 1...e5. Unfortunately for the Pro, it plays double King pawn openings terribly (although I did walk into a couple of opening traps). Here Houdini plays a variation known to be winning for Black:
Can Houdini 3 be beaten?
Sort:
"7.Nxf7 { This is ridiculous. }"
Well, we do agree on something...
Based on the games you've been showing us recently, I'm convinced that when you start to play a game, you just leave the strength on its default setting of 1000. And I think you're doing this on purpose - There's no way you can miss this setting.
http://chess-king.com/docs/help/classical_chess.htm
I'm outta here...This has gotten beyond ridiculous.
Red4444 wrote:
sloughterchess, i am sorry but you are the most arrogant and stupidest person in the world...I looked the moves, you are clearly playing Houdini at the beginner strength with even a crazy opening book. Stop it, shame on you
I have done nothing of the sort; this is the setting chosen by the manufacturer---if there is a problem, it is with the factory setting picking random moves from an opening book.
When the computer plays well, it plays very well; when it screws up the opening it does poorly. In just the Lolli variation of the Two Knights Defense it will play
4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.d4 Nxd4 7.c3 f6 (a known continuation)
4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.d4 exd4? 7.O-O (known to be +/-)
4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.d4 Be7 7.Nxf7 +/= (a known line)
4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.d4 exd4 7.O-O Be7 or 7.O-O h6
All these continuations are book for the computer.
EscherehcsE wrote:
"7.Nxf7 { This is ridiculous. }"
Well, we do agree on something...
Based on the games you've been showing us recently, I'm convinced that when you start to play a game, you just leave the strength on its default setting of 1000. And I think you're doing this on purpose - There's no way you can miss this setting.
http://chess-king.com/docs/help/classical_chess.htm
I'm outta here...This has gotten beyond ridiculous.
The computer is set to the maximum strength, 3200.
sloughterchess wrote:
EscherehcsE wrote:
"7.Nxf7 { This is ridiculous. }"
Well, we do agree on something...
Based on the games you've been showing us recently, I'm convinced that when you start to play a game, you just leave the strength on its default setting of 1000. And I think you're doing this on purpose - There's no way you can miss this setting.
http://chess-king.com/docs/help/classical_chess.htm
I'm outta here...This has gotten beyond ridiculous.
The computer is set to the maximum strength, 3200.
Then Please, get a refund for CK and move on to another GUI. Just stop posting these nonsense games and pretending they mean anything. Nobody is taking you seriously any more.
Maybe you have a new computer virus - the chess engine virus. It doesn't want your personal or financial information, but it makes your chess engine play like crap! 
EscherehcsE wrote:
sloughterchess wrote:
EscherehcsE wrote:
"7.Nxf7 { This is ridiculous. }"
Well, we do agree on something...
Based on the games you've been showing us recently, I'm convinced that when you start to play a game, you just leave the strength on its default setting of 1000. And I think you're doing this on purpose - There's no way you can miss this setting.
http://chess-king.com/docs/help/classical_chess.htm
I'm outta here...This has gotten beyond ridiculous.
The computer is set to the maximum strength, 3200.
Then Please, get a refund for CK and move on to another GUI. Just stop posting these nonsense games and pretending they mean anything. Nobody is taking you seriously any more.
Maybe you have a new computer virus - the chess engine virus. It doesn't want your personal or financial information, but it makes your chess engine play like crap!
As I have indicated only the opening book is suspect; the computer's play after it screws up the opening shows its 3200 level ability. Check out the next post where I had a clear advantage out of the opening after the computer chose the inferior 8...h6, a book line.
I had a good game until I overlooked a three mover. The Houdini Pro achieved a universal position on move 13; I achieved a UP on move 24.
The Pro made a tactical oversight on move 10 of the Fried Liver and never recovered:
We are all so fortunate that a 1400-ish player gave us the universal recipe to beat computers. Shame Kasparov didn't know back in 1997.
Irontiger wrote:
We are all so fortunate that a 1400-ish player gave us the universal recipe to beat computers. Shame Kasparov didn't know back in 1997.
GM Roman Dzindzichashvili knows I am not a 1700 player, gives my games serious analysis, agrees that my Houdini 3 is a strong program, and accepts the fact that I can outplay Houdini 3.
sloughterchess wrote:
Irontiger wrote:
We are all so fortunate that a 1400-ish player gave us the universal recipe to beat computers. Shame Kasparov didn't know back in 1997.
GM Roman Dzindzichashvili knows I am not a 1700 player, gives my games serious analysis, agrees that my Houdini 3 is a strong program, and accepts the fact that I can outplay Houdini 3.
Yeah, sure.
The moon is made of cheese, too.
[COMMENT DELETED]
FEDTEL wrote:
Inspired by your multiply wins against Houdini, I gave it a try and scored a wonderful win against it, I followed your recipe so thank you first and foremost.
GM Viktor Korchnoi validated my result and congratulated me on my beautiful win.
Of course, its opening book might be a bit defective, but who cares. Wonderful win, you just proved that humans can win against computers.
Oh my god! thanks to this bizarre post i´m finding out natalia pogonina is a chess.com member. I´m commenting the same post she commented... Guys: I think i´m in love 
manfredmann wrote:
sloughterchess wrote:
Irontiger wrote:
We are all so fortunate that a 1400-ish player gave us the universal recipe to beat computers. Shame Kasparov didn't know back in 1997.
GM Roman Dzindzichashvili knows I am not a 1700 player, gives my games serious analysis, agrees that my Houdini 3 is a strong program, and accepts the fact that I can outplay Houdini 3.
You are 1728. You've been rated as high as 1799 in the past 11 years. Roman is a pro - of course he takes a student seriously. But I'm pretty sure that he does NOT believe that you can outplay Houdini since no GM seems to be able to do so. You are rated 1000+ points below all these guys who can't beat it. You cannot beat it, unless you are dumbibg it down in some way.
You are using Houdini 3. What platform? x32, x64, how many CPUs/cores, clock rates? how much memory? I'm playing over your Two Knights game with a recent, commercially available Houdini, which gives ...Bb7 as its seventh (!) option at d20. At greater search deepth ...Bb7 looks even worse.
When my game is "off" I am terrible player; when my game is "on" I have already drawn GM Lev Alburt in a Blumenfeld Counter Gambit where he is a leading expert in the only game we ever played so my record against Grandmasters at blitz is 1/2-1/2. As I have indicated many times I have beaten a stronger computer in a game called Magic where I gave the computer 9 moves in a row at the start of the game (see below) and an extra hour on the clock for each of its moves. I took only a few seconds/move relying entirely on intuition. If you think it is easy to do this try it. I have also had one of my games against a Postal Expert published in its entirety in Inside Chess a magazine devoted to chess professionals. Here is the starting position of Magic:
I am using Houdini 3 Pro running on an i7 CPU socket 1155, dual core, I believe, 4 GM Memory 500 GB hard drive. GM Dzindzichashvili says this is a "good" setup.
For some reason the computer is programmed to play inferior openings from the factory setting. I am trying to get this fixed and have contacted the manufacturer through Diego, service representative of Chess King. While 8...Bb
7 is not the best option, it is a rock solid choice that has been analyzed by the opening specialists at Chess King (his wife is the Woman's World Champion). Black plays for an immediate c5/Nc6 immediately bringing the Knight back into play threatening Nd4; I have to play c3 which weakens the d3 square.
This game was played at FIDE level i.e. 2 hours for the first 40 moves; since the first 11 are book, it is actually 2 hours for 30 moves. When we reach the time control the computer has lost on time twice (software glitch), but in the final position when I had the Pro play out both sides of the position at blitz speed, White wins.
manfredmann wrote:
sloughterchess wrote:
Irontiger wrote:
We are all so fortunate that a 1400-ish player gave us the universal recipe to beat computers. Shame Kasparov didn't know back in 1997.
GM Roman Dzindzichashvili knows I am not a 1700 player, gives my games serious analysis, agrees that my Houdini 3 is a strong program, and accepts the fact that I can outplay Houdini 3.
You are USCF 1728. You've been rated as high as 1799 in the past 11 years. Roman is a pro - of course he takes a student seriously. But I'm pretty sure that he does NOT believe that you can outplay Houdini since no GM seems to be able to do so. You are rated 1000+ points below all these guys who can't beat it. You cannot beat it, unless you are dumbibg it down in some way.
You are using Houdini 3. What platform? x32, x64, how many CPUs/cores, clock rates? how much memory? I'm playing over your Two Knights game with a recent, commercially available Houdini, which gives ...Bb7 as its seventh (!) option at d20. At greater search deepth ...Bb7 looks even worse, giving White a substantial advantage from the start. Why did you pick this lousy move for Houdini to make? You should play all of Houdini's first choices - let's call them H1's (Fritz's first choices would be F1's, Stockfish second choice S2, etc). Don't muck around with Houdini's choices! Houdini's book (or what it calculates - either way) would be 7...Be7 H1, 7...Rb8 H2 or 7...h6, a human recommendation from GM Nigel Davies' book 'Play 1.e4 e5!' Of course, these would be at a reasonable depth of search. I chose d20 because I could keep up with it at that rate documenting the choices made in your game.
Once you got out of book (I take this to be the point at which no more database games are available, not some arbitrary number like 8 or 10 moves, which would leave both sides continuing to play H1 moves that weren't necessarily their own independent choices - assuming, as we know, that the titled players in the database used H, F, S and other engines in their extensive opening prep)... then you and Houdini both made a long series of H1 moves. Of course, ALL of Houdini's moves should be H1's. On the other hand, as a 17xx player only some fraction of yours should be H1's. Your fraction was quite high, especially after you were out of book. Then towards the end of the game you suddenly starting playing 17xx moves. You voluntarily created weaknesses, withdrew your pieces and played almost a hedgehog, but a very passive one. Houdini maneuvered around and calculated where to stick the knife. No surprise, the 17xx player loses despite making many H1 and not always making H1 for the engine. How does this substantiate your claim that "Roman accepts the FACT (my emphasis) that I can outplay Houdini 3"? You are seriously delusional.
So, I'm not sure what you think this game proves? You played a helluva lot of H1 moves which kept it close, then collapsed. You had a slight advantage at first because of the crummy 7...Bb7? which is not close to an H1, but even then you were never close to winning.
In game 2 you're asking Houdini to defend the Fried Liver Attack, so you forced the choice of 5...Nxd5, not Houdini. That move was not an H1.Then it is a matter of long theory. I'm sure that White played alot of H1s again and I doubt that Houdini played 100% H1s.
You can't beat Houdini. Stop saying you can. If Roman comes out publicly and says a 17xx player can beat Houdini, he'll the chess world will take a very close look at his explanation. Meanwhile, please don't represent what he says. Cheers.
The Houdini 3 Pro routinely chooses the Fried Liver; as I indicated dozens of post ago, I have long since stopped Houdini 3 or the Pro from playing opens I choose; it only plays openings it chooses.
sloughterchess wrote:
(...)While 8...Bb7 is not the best option, it is a rock solid choice that has been analyzed by the opening specialists at Chess King (his wife is the Woman's World Champion). (...)
In the next ten games Houdini can play anything but the Two Knights Defense; White got a protected passed pawn, but got run over by a pawn roller.