deliberate programming defect houdini 3 and Pro

Anyone purchasing Houdini 3 and Houdini 3 Pro hoping to compete against a 3300 level machine is deluding themselves. The programmers of Houdini 3 and the Pro have deliberately promoted the practice of having them play anything but the best move, thus the play mode is meaningless if you expect a 3300 opponent.

According to a representative of the sales force, Houdini 3 and the Pro were designed for analysis, not over the board play, so there is no attempt by the programmer to have them play the best moves, so randomly, they play junk so the "average" playing strength of the program is random and varies from 1200-2300 in play mode, not 3300.

If you want to play chess against a World Class program, then Rybka 4 Extreme is a vastly superior choice.

Interesting.  Is that why Houdini 3 is atop of the computer rating lists?  You know the ones who get their results by actually having the program "play," not analyze?

I guess this is some sort of shill post for Rybka (which is #5, not even #2).

Houdini 3 Pro will often play the following move order in the play mode: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.Qf3+ Ke8??

Here is some additional "classic" Houdini 3 Pro opening play. I should specify that the program is set to its maximum setting, 3200. Then it randomly chooses levels ranging from Level 1 to Level 32. To this day I have no idea which is the better level to optimize Houdini Pro's playing ability.

4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Nxd5 6.Nxf7 Kxf7 7.Qf3+ Ke6 8.Nc3 Nd4? 9.Bxd5+ +/-

What is clear is that Houdart is using an entirely different program when playing against other computers than is being sold to the public. Houdini 3 and Houdini 3 Pro sold to the public play junk in the play mode.

I don't really think sloughterchess is shilling for Rybka; I just think he's genuinely confused. He's never really been able to distinguish between engines and GUIs. Why, I don't know. It's not a difficult concept to understand, but it's always seemed to be beyond his grasp.

The fact that Houdini 3 is at the top of every rating chart tells me that more likely the problem noted by sloughterchess has to do with the Chess King GUI instead of the Houdini engine itself. I'm guessing that the "junk moves" sloughterchess mentions originates either from the CK opening book playing suboptimal moves, or the CK GUI choosing suboptimal moves from the engine output once the engine has left book. (I'm not sure which is the case.)

Of course, sloughterchess could verify whether the Houdini engine works OK simply by installing the Houdini engine that came with CK into another free GUI that uses a free, high quality opening book. However, we already suggested that approach, and so far he hasn't seen the need to try it. I doubt if he will ever try it.

Why is that Rybka 4 Extreme provided by its manufacturer comes with an excellent opening book, plays at 3150 level and doesn't require the user to jump through hoops to get optimal play? Why should the purchaser of a $100 program expect or predict that the manufacurer would deliberately provide suboptimal play in play mode? Why is that Rykba 4 can do it but Houdart doesn't seem to feel the necessity to provide this to the public/purchaser?

Houdini 3 and Houdini 3 Pro doesn't just have a faulty opening book, it plays 4th 5th and 6th best moves in the middlegame as well, long after it has left opening book. Why hasn't Houdart installed programming that should require Houdini 3 and Houdini 3 Pro in play mode to choose the best move? In other words in play mode, how difficult would it have been for Houdart, no matter what GUI is being used, to have the machines choose the best move determined in analysis?

Because I don't think that's how the UCI communication protocol works. The engine gets the board position from the GUI, then the engine calculates however many PV moves it's been asked to calculate; One, two, three, etc. Once the engine is finished calculating the moves, it passes that information back to the GUI and then goes idle until asked to do something else. A normal GUI would then take those moves, pick the #1 move, and play that move. If a stupid GUI decides to play the #2 (or #3 or #4) move, there's nothing the engine can do about it. It's all up to how the GUI has been programmed.

Thought this was going to be about how buggy Chessbase is. 

This doesn't answer the fundmental question why the end user should expect anything less than optimal play. It is the ultimate responsibility of the programmer to assure the end user that he is receiving the product as advertised i.e. a 3300 level program that plays at 3300 level. Houdart should have notified his distributors, in this case, Chess King, that it was critical that the GUI function appropriately.

The GUI for Rybka 4 Extreme works just fine. How difficult would it have been for Houdart to specify that only preapproved GUI's be used in conjunction with the program? Why should the end user need to do anything but just install the program to get optimum performance?

I'm sure that Houdart expected the GUI to function properly. But if the GUI doesn't function properly, whose fault is that...The guy that supplies a good engine to the GUI designer, or the designer of the GUI that doesn't operate as the user expects?

It's sort of like going to the Ford dealership and having them put on a set of new tires. If the dealership fails to align the tires properly and the tires wear out too soon, whose fault is it? Are you going to yell at the tire manufacturer because a tire rep wasn't standing over the mechanic who was doing the alignment?

You stated, "It is the ultimate responsibility of the programmer to assure the end user that he is receiving the product as advertised...". That's only partly right. You should have said, "It is the ultimate responsibility of the programmer of the GUI to assure the end user that he is receiving the product as advertised...". The chess engine is the slave, and the GUI is the master. Houdart supplied an engine that adheres to the UCI specification (we're assuming at this point) to the designer of the GUI. It would be nice if Houdart could somehow ensure that the GUI designer is doing a good job, but ultimately the proper functioning of the GUI/engine combination is the responsibility of the GUI designer. You bought the package from Chess King. They have the ultimate responsibility for proper function.

If Ford knew that many distributors were likely to improperly align the tires, under inflate the tires or sell retreads, knew that it was critical that good tires be installed, and still sold the car knowing that its distributors would get inferior performance from a product advertised to get 33mpg, then it is Ford's responsibility to fix the problem. 

I did not buy a "work in progress"; I bought a finished product. It is Houdart's responsibility when advertising a product supposedly playing at 3300 level to use due diligence to see his product is performing as advertised. It is up to him to ensure that any distributor of his product is unlikely to sell a machine making gross errors.

Houdart could have anticipated this problem and require any distributor of his product to install a GUI that in play mode would always choose the first and best choice in play mode. The machine comes with a setting of "fun mode" at 800 level all the way up to 3200 its maximum setting.

Houdart ultimately is responsible for dealing only with reputable distributors of his product. Did he test the products that were being sold by his distributors to see if the program was performing as advertised? It is up to Houdart in the advertising to say, "Program plays at 3300 level provided the distributor installs the appropriate GUI". Did Houdart put a disclaimer in his product?

Sloughterfish, not to be disrespectful, and no I am not going to get into some long debate here on the why, and why not's as in another Forum Topic which you started on this very subject. Which I might add I didn't even bother going through it all. What a fiasco.

But... Programmers can not make any program that will run on everything under the sun ( OS's, that might work for one computer, might not on different computers  even with the same OS's, and can cause some programs to go haywire, and not run properly ). It could be something as simple as your system's parameters. It could even be something else with your system. All it takes is one little thing.

I am not an expert in this area, although I know if one little thing isn't right, you can have a program act funny/inproperly, if it will even work at all.

Yes I know it stinks, but that is the way life is. Its not just chess programs either. Its pretty much every program out there, because everyone pretty much has a different computer, or OS, or something that can cause a problem, with said program. Take it up with the company that makes Houdini. You may have done that, and didn't like their answer, well again try getting your money back  from them then.  I hope you don't take this advice the wrong way. Good luck.

Just let the crackpot rail on by himself...we've seen this thread before.

This is the most retarded thread I've seen in a long time.

I spent $700 to have a computer specialist create a PC with the expressed purpose of optimizing Houdini 3's playing ability so I don't think it is OS. He installed an i7 cpu socket 1155  4GB memory 500 GB hard drive so the defect most likely is with the GUI relied on by Chess King.

Thank you for clarifying the situation

As a quick example of the above-mentioned retardedness, I'd like to point out that I've run dozens of tests on my computer using over 20 different engines, and Houdini 3.0 is, consistently, on top. Also, one of my friends went on chesshotel.com, which does not forbid the use of chess engines, according to him, and pitted it against people there. It has yet to lose a game, crushing everyone in sight, including the other random people using engines...

Sloughterfish, you could have spent a million dollars with the expressed purpose to run it. That is not the whole point of my post though. Even experts are fallible, your program you bought either by DVD, CD, or online Download could be faulty and still load up, but might glitch. Is Chess King the only GUI you are having problems with ?

Try another one then, and BTW $700 is not that much for a system custom built. In otherwords if it is that important to you, which evidently it is, get another GUI, even if you have to pay for it. However in your particular circumstance I am not sure that is the only issue. Perhaps the person that built it could fix it, or contact Houdini/Chess King and have them upgrade their multi mega buck systems, that apparently works for other people, I don't know because I don't have Houdini, nor Chess King. Try their forums they could help you better than me. Good luck

Don't get frustrated with me, you seem to know all the answers, if you have tried all I have mentioned, its pretty obvious you probably have a system glitch somewhere, and before you get smart with me on this, there wouldn't necessarily be a way to tell that except when a program doesn't act correct on your system.

Rybka 4 Extreme works fine; Houdini 3 and Houdini 3 Pro from Chess King don't work at all so I guess the problem is with their GUI. Yes I am frustrated, but not with you but with a product that doesn't perform as advertised. I am waiting to see if Chess King stands behind their product.

Chess king is a program for children to learn to move the pieces. I believe even the playing mode is made to default to handicap levels. But you can set it on full strength. The Houdini 3 Pro in the regular Fritz interface or aquarium interface also have the capacity for handicap playing, but they're not the default. Houdini is the strongest chess engine on the market, I'm pretty sure you are playing handicap levels in the children's interface.

Perhaps the OP will download the free arena and see how he does against Houdini3. I think he'll quickly see why everybody here was so incredulous.