This is so full of crap, and anyway 9.Ng4 is an invalid move, I think you meant Ng3.
Yeah, 9.Ng3 is what he meant. The rest of the moves are correct. To get it into PGN shape, you'd have to clean it up a bit (e.g. change several occurences of ch to +).
First example of a game is not played by Houdini 1.5 on a strong computer that's for sure.
Nothing more to do here.
Sorry, but this is just stupid, Houdini on full strength doesn't make mistakes like 24... Ba4 or 27... Rh5. You must've done something wrong in preferences. Just a couple of things, can't bother to show all variations, mistakes and inaccuracies.
Maybe we could set up a match between you and Houdini 3 through the community...this will lay this to rest...
If a willing participant would come forth that owns Houdini 3...the two of you could continue to exchange moves in the forum and we could follow along with updated game sequence boards.... ?
Any takers, have this already been proven this is a sham ? Let's find out...
With random opening choices, Houdini will win easily; however, if this is a test of the soundness of the Two Knights' Defense then:
I believe that the Berliner Gambit and the alternative to the Berliner given in MCO 15 are both +- i.e. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.Bf1 Nxd5 8.Ne4 Qh4? (Ne6 9.Bxb5ch Bd7 10.Bc4 +/-) 9.Ng3 Bg4 10.f3+- or 9.Ng3 Bb7 +-. The Ulvestad where Black plays 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.Bf1 h6 (book according to MCO 15) is +-. The Wilkes Barre/Traxler 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 is +/- The main line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5ch c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Qf3 is only +/=, and a tougher test. Houdini should win in the main line. It is also likely that Houdini will win with Black in the Fried Liver (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.Nxf7) because the Fried Liver is close to equal; the Lolli looks equal, but Houdini may not know correct book (Heisman Variation---1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.d4 Nxd4!=); if it plays known book it might well lose. I'd be happy to take on Houdini 3 to test any of these openings with the understanding I'll be lucky to draw in the main line or against 5...Nxd5. Since I can't play endgames well then an evaluation of +- in the late middlegame should be an adequate test.
Maybe we could set up a match between you and Houdini 3 through the community...this will lay this to rest...
If a willing participant would come forth that owns Houdini 3...the two of you could continue to exchange moves in the forum and we could follow along with updated game sequence boards.... ?
Any takers, have this already been proven this is a sham ? Let's find out...
With random opening choices, Houdini will win easily; however, if this is a test of the soundness of the Two Knights' Defense then:
I believe that the Berliner Gambit and the alternative to the Berliner given in MCO 15 are both +- i.e. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.Bf1 Nxd5 8.Ne4 Qh4? (Ne6 9.Bxb5ch Bd7 10.Bc4 +/-) 9.Ng3 Bg4 10.f3+- or 9.Ng3 Bb7 +-. The Ulvestad where Black plays 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.Bf1 h6 (book according to MCO 15) is +-. The Wilkes Barre/Traxler 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 is +/- The main line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5ch c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Qf3 is only +/=, and a tougher test. Houdini should win in the main line. It is also likely that Houdini will win with Black in the Fried Liver (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.Nxf7) because the Fried Liver is close to equal; the Lolli looks equal, but Houdini may not know correct book (Heisman Variation---1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.d4 Nxd4!=); if it plays known book it might well lose. I'd be happy to take on Houdini 3 to test any of these openings with the understanding I'll be lucky to draw in the main line or against 5...Nxd5. Since I can't play endgames well then an evaluation of +- in the late middlegame should be an adequate test.
Yeah, drawing probably is attainable if you have Houdini 3 and so does the person you'd be playing...it wouldn't be rocket science...
what was the time control setting for Houdini 3?
The problem is not time control; the problem is I bought a POS from a mass outlet that rhymes with smart. It has 4 GB memory and 325 GB hard drive, but a celeron!! processor. My lap top is running through molasses between Windows 8 and the Houdini program; my computer guy is building me a computer that can run the optimum systems requirement of the program.
I would also win against 4-ply Houdini :D
Maybe we could set up a match between you and Houdini 3 through the community...this will lay this to rest...
If a willing participant would come forth that owns Houdini 3...the two of you could continue to exchange moves in the forum and we could follow along with updated game sequence boards.... ?
Any takers, have this already been proven this is a sham ? Let's find out...
With random opening choices, Houdini will win easily; however, if this is a test of the soundness of the Two Knights' Defense then:
I believe that the Berliner Gambit and the alternative to the Berliner given in MCO 15 are both +- i.e. 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.Bf1 Nxd5 8.Ne4 Qh4? (Ne6 9.Bxb5ch Bd7 10.Bc4 +/-) 9.Ng3 Bg4 10.f3+- or 9.Ng3 Bb7 +-. The Ulvestad where Black plays 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 b5 6.Bf1 h6 (book according to MCO 15) is +-. The Wilkes Barre/Traxler 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 is +/- The main line 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5ch c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Qf3 is only +/=, and a tougher test. Houdini should win in the main line. It is also likely that Houdini will win with Black in the Fried Liver (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.Nxf7) because the Fried Liver is close to equal; the Lolli looks equal, but Houdini may not know correct book (Heisman Variation---1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.d4 Nxd4!=); if it plays known book it might well lose. I'd be happy to take on Houdini 3 to test any of these openings with the understanding I'll be lucky to draw in the main line or against 5...Nxd5. Since I can't play endgames well then an evaluation of +- in the late middlegame should be an adequate test.
Yeah, drawing probably is attainable if you have Houdini 3 and so does the person you'd be playing...it wouldn't be rocket science...
The only "proof" that I am playing the game not just relying on Houdini 3 (which I will only use to blunder check) is that my choices will, occasionally, differ from Houdini's choices.
if u study an opening and write the opening to book and get houdini to play nothing but that opening and study where he will play in a short time control you can groom the win. so in that light yes you can beat houdini. but if you put houdini on a strong computer with a massive opening book houdini will simply crush you everytime.
Houdini 4, whenever that may be, will likely be able to beat Houdini 3 in a match. Houdini 9, 10, etc (if Houdini upgrades continue throughout the years), would stomp a mudhole into Houdini 3 in a match.
Houdini 4, whenever that may be, will likely be able to beat Houdini 3 in a match. Houdini 9, 10, etc (if Houdini upgrades continue throughout the years), would stomp a mudhole into Houdini 3 in a match.
Houdini 9 sucks! Houdini 8 will have had been much better!
Is the engine elo depending on CPU strength increase over time or mainly dependent author work.
Of course if given free will, Houdini will be very happy to play 5...Na5! and considers the position as at least equal for Black. So do I, and so does most of chess theory. I suspect Houdini would kill me after 5...Na5, but I have no need to find out.
Hi Paul,
Houdini 3 made some odd choices. Did I miss a win here?
Here is a test of one of the key main lines of the TKD, the Fritz [300'30 game in 1] (Against the 5...Na5 variation, White is better after: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5ch c6 7.dxc6 bxc6 8.Qf3, 8...Qc7, 8...h6, 8...Bb7, and 8...cxb5; however, after 8...Be7 and 8...Rb8, it is equal.)
4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nd4 6.c3 b5 7.Bf1 Nxd5 8.cxd4 Qxg5 9.Bxb5ch Kd8 10.O-O Rb8 [the usual try here is Bb7 11.Qf3 Rb8 12.dxe5! Ne3 13.Qh3 Qxg2+ 14.Qxg2 Nxg2 15.d4 Nh4 16.Bg5+ Be7 17.Bxh4! +/-] 11.Bc6 exd4 12.d3 Qf5 13.Re1 Bd6 14.Nd2 Rb6 15.Bxd5 Qxd5 16.Nc4
Now White prevents Black from getting the Bishop pair which can be used to provoke weaknesses on the Kingside; White is better. Ra6 17.Nxd6 cxd6? (Why not Qxd6 here? Why doesn't the computer recognize how weak the d-pawns are? Houdini spent over 10 minutes on this move.)
18.Qe2 Bd7 19.Qe7ch Kc8 20.Qh4 Re8 (White should not have been able to simply so easily; clearly Black's practical play up to here must be improved. What Houdini doesn't realize is that I have the draw “in hand” and can now try to find the win.) 21.Rxe8 Bxe8 22.b3
Rc6 23.Bb2 Rc2 24.Bxd4 g5! (Houdini earns its nickname; it sees that a Rook on the seventh is worth a pawn and just simplifies into a BOC ending) 25.Qe4 Qxe4 26.dxe4
Draw offer declined---Kb7 27.Rd1! The simplest pathway to a draw. Rxa2 28.Bf6 Ra3 29.Bxg5 Rxb3 30.Be7 Bb5? (The start of a dubious plan) 31.Bxd6 (Draw offer declined) Rd3? (What Houdini doesn't realize is that it's passed pawn is the wrong color while my potentially passed h-pawn is the right color; Houdini obviously (?) knows how to draw this---it is getting out to Depth = 33) 32.Rxd3 Bxd3 33.f3 Kc6 34.Be7 Kb5? (Playing for the loss) 35.Kf2 a5
36.g4 (Houdini's evaluation suddenly shot to +1.45; then it saw it had to return to the Kingside and dropped the evaluation to +1.00) Kc6 37.Ke3 Bc2 38.h4 Kd7 39.Ba3 a4 40.g5 (+1.58) Ke6 41.Bf8 Bd1 42.h5 f6 43.g6 hxg6 44.h6 a3 45.Bxa3 Kf7 46.Bb2 Bb3 47.h7 Kg7 48.h8Q+ Kxh8 49.Bxf6+ 1/2-1/2
I think we have found our new Borislav Ivanov!
I believe it was Alekhine who once said that to beat him you had to beat him in the opening, the middlegame and the endgame. In the Wilkes-Barre, one of the sharpest openings in all of chess, I routinely could get an advantage of +/- in the late middlegame against Houdini 3, but couldn't bring home the point. Although I've draw several games against Houdini, this is the closest I have come to a win. How does White win a won game?
1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5 5.Bxf7ch Ke7
6.Bc4! (There is almost no analysis of this variation and no master games where this was played except for one crush by White reported by Estrin in Wilkes-Barre Variation Two Knights Defense. Williams, The Real American Wilkes-Barre, offers almost no analysis; MCO 13, 14, or 15, offer no analysis, nor does BCO 2---White anticipates an exchange sacrifice on f3 which can be neutralized if White can play Be2) Na5?! (One way to meet the threat of Nf7, the point being if Nf7 Qe8 8.Nxh8 Nxc4 and the Knight is dead---Qe8 is equivalent, +/-; Rf8 is +/=)7.Bd3!! (When I first studied this variation, Houdini found this; I exploit this here. White defends e4 in anticipation of h6 8.Nf3 Nxe4; true, White has an advantage after Nxe4 but it isn't as great) h6 8.Nf3 d6 9.Nc3 Be6 10.Be2 (I have been able to draw with Na4, but decided to try something different; rather than play tactically against the computer, I try quiet, positional play) Nc6 (Demonstrating that Na5 is a bad idea) 11.d3 a6 12.Na4 (To free the c-pawn) Ba7 13.O-O (I considered b3 with the idea of Nb2) Kf7 14.h3 (Luft and taking away g4) Rf8 15.b3 (Anticipating an isolated pawn on e5 after Black plays d5) Kg8 16.Be3 Bd4 17.c3 (Houdini doesn't like this move; the point is that Nb2 defends the d3 square. There is no threat against f3 or f2, but now I have to watch for cheapos on h3) Bxe3 18.fxe3 b5 19.Nb2 d5 20.exd5 Nxd5 21.Qc1 (I still can't see any tactical shots against my King but I'm wondering what the silicon beast has up its sleeve) Qd6 (Now I think that White is better) 22.Nd1! (I didn't calculate anything in depth here; I couldn't see any obvious tactical shots. No matter what I need this Knight on the Kingside. This defends e3 and c3 and prepares Nf2 holding h3) Rab8?! (I don't understand this move) 23.c4 (This seems to make the most sense; now Black must exchange a critical pawn and give me a solid pawn majority in the center) bxc4 24.bxc4 Nf6 25.Nf2 (Now I'm stuck; I played this quickly; perhaps it is not best) Qc5 26.Rd1 (Preparing d4) Qa5 27.Rd2 (I know Houdini is seeing ahead 10-12 moves, so this part of the game is pretty scary. Right now I'm just trying to maintain good piece coordination) Bf5 28.d4 e4 29.Nh2 (Intending to recycle the Knight to the f1 square where it defends e3----suddenly it hit me! I can hit e4 four times!) Kh8 30.Nf1 (I'm winning, and, with a big lead on the clock [This was played at 120'40 60'20 game 30], I just have to watch out for the shots; this obeys the edict of Nimzowitch to overprotect the base of the pawn chain) Qb4 31.Nf1 Qd6 32.c5 Qe7 33.Rb2 (Rooks belong on open files) Rxb2 34.Qxb2 (Each exchange brings White closer to victory) Nd5 35.Bxa6 (I can't understand what I am missing. Houdini is in mild time trouble---18 minutes until the time control; I have over an hour on the clock) Rb8 36.Qe2 (Just connecting my pieces and anticipating Nb4/Nd3) Qg5 (With the obvious hit on h3) 37.Kh2 h5 (At long last the win should be a matter of technique) 38.Bc4 Nce7 39.Bxd5 Nxd5 40.Qe1 (Just getting ready to push the a-pawn. I have good piece coordination and two extra pawns Re8 41.a4 Bc8 42.Nc3 Nxc3 43.Qxc3 (I was threatening to walk off with the e-pawn) h4 44.Qe1 (When I push the a-pawn I can get Black to give up pressure on the h3 square. I can combine threats to Queen the pawn and occupy the e5 square with my Knight) Ba6 45.Nd2 Bd3 46.a5 Re6 47.g4 (Necessity is the mother of invention; I need to defend the g2 square) g6 48.Ra2 Kg7 49.Rb2 Re7 50.Ra2 (I do not have a clue how to win this; later analyzing with the computer, once I played c5, that was a critical mistake.
) Re6 51.Ra3 Ra6 52.Ra1 Qd8 53.Kg2 c6 54.Nf1 Ra7 55.Nh2 (Draw offer declined) g5 56.Nf1 Bxf1 57.Kxf1 Rf6ch 58.Kg2 Rf3 59.a6 Rg3ch 60.Kh2?? (Kh1 =) Qc7 0-1
When creating the analysis diagram, I found a mistake in my notation so the final moves are screwed up.
This is so full of crap, and anyway 9.Ng4 is an invalid move, I think you meant Ng3.