Why Is Houdini Not Entered In The WCCC??

[Sean Evans]

What I don't understand is why so many on this forum are now hunting Robert Houdart.

Not hunting, just trying to find the truth, which Robert and Houdini are severely lacking! Robert is the biggest computer chess liar on the Internet...PERIOD !

Cordially,

Sean

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

What I don't understand is why so many on this forum are now hunting Robert Houdart.

Not hunting, just trying to find the truth, which Robert and Houdini are severely lacking! Robert is the biggest computer chess liar on the Internet...PERIOD !

Cordially,

Sean

Please don't insult Vasik by taking away the title from him....our guy comes second to Rybka's author

[Charles]

As far as honesty is concerned, there are many who are clones of Vas!

[Dr. Ivannik]

What I don't understand is why so many on this forum are now hunting Robert Houdart.

Not hunting, just trying to find the truth, which Robert and Houdini are severely lacking! Robert is the biggest computer chess liar on the Internet...PERIOD !

Cordially,

Sean

Gentlemen

Robert Houdart owe's no explanation for anything to anyone it's that simple. His product is available for (free) those who choose to enjoy it. Robert has provided a certain amount of information concerning his product. Should some people still have problems with Houdini you must understand your complaints are worth what Robert charges for this engine. --- nothing---

I wonder if some of these people who consistently complain about Robert's excellent work actually have Houdini in their engine file. Using it for their analysis on annotated chess material and such. Because that would be rich.

Thank you

Dr. Ivannik

[Charles]

What I don't understand is why so many on this forum are now hunting Robert Houdart.

Not hunting, just trying to find the truth, which Robert and Houdini are severely lacking! Robert is the biggest computer chess liar on the Internet...PERIOD !

Cordially,

Sean

Gentlemen

Robert Houdart owe's no explanation for anything to anyone it's that simple. His product is available for (free) those who choose to enjoy it. Robert has provided a certain amount of information concerning his product. Should some people still have problems with Houdini you must understand your complaints are worth what Robert charges for this engine. --- nothing---

I wonder if some of these people who consistently complain about Robert's excellent work actually have Houdini in their engine file. Using it for their analysis on annotated chess material and such. Because that would be rich.

Thank you

Dr. Ivannik

true, but people have a right to question the origins of engines.

In the beginning, I was outraged that discussions of Ippolit was pretty much banned in talk chess (moved to hidden forum). But, open chess should mean open discussion not blind support for any engine.
At least there is a report out on Ippolit origins -- I will like to to glean more info on that as well. Similarly for Rybka - fruit connection.
Same for Houdini. Robert has already stated his side, now others can prove/disprove if he is telling the truth.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with determining origin of engines. I would like to know origins of all popular engines -commercial, open source, free, public domain ...

[slobo]

What I don't understand is why so many on this forum are now hunting Robert Houdart.

Not hunting, just trying to find the truth, which Robert and Houdini are severely lacking! Robert is the biggest computer chess liar on the Internet...PERIOD !

Cordially,

Sean

Gentlemen

Robert Houdart owe's no explanation for anything to anyone it's that simple. His product is available for (free) those who choose to enjoy it. Robert has provided a certain amount of information concerning his product. Should some people still have problems with Houdini you must understand your complaints are worth what Robert charges for this engine. --- nothing---

I wonder if some of these people who consistently complain about Robert's excellent work actually have Houdini in their engine file. Using it for their analysis on annotated chess material and such. Because that would be rich.

Thank you

Dr. Ivannik

true, but people have a right to question the origins of engines.

In the beginning, I was outraged that discussions of Ippolit was pretty much banned in talk chess (moved to hidden forum). But, open chess should mean open discussion not blind support for any engine.
At least there is a report out on Ippolit origins -- I will like to to glean more info on that as well. Similarly for Rybka - fruit connection.
Same for Houdini. Robert has already stated his side, now others can prove/disprove if he is telling the truth.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with determining origin of engines. I would like to know origins of all popular engines -commercial, open source, free, public domain ...

You´re right Charles,

let me put it in a snappy form:
we are not against Houdini, that nice and innocent chess engine,
we are against its author lies.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

What I don't understand is why so many on this forum are now hunting Robert Houdart.

Not hunting, just trying to find the truth, which Robert and Houdini are severely lacking! Robert is the biggest computer chess liar on the Internet...PERIOD !

Cordially,

Sean

Gentlemen

Robert Houdart owe's no explanation for anything to anyone it's that simple. His product is available for (free) those who choose to enjoy it. Robert has provided a certain amount of information concerning his product. Should some people still have problems with Houdini you must understand your complaints are worth what Robert charges for this engine. --- nothing---

I wonder if some of these people who consistently complain about Robert's excellent work actually have Houdini in their engine file. Using it for their analysis on annotated chess material and such. Because that would be rich.

Thank you

Dr. Ivannik

true, but people have a right to question the origins of engines.

In the beginning, I was outraged that discussions of Ippolit was pretty much banned in talk chess (moved to hidden forum). But, open chess should mean open discussion not blind support for any engine.
At least there is a report out on Ippolit origins -- I will like to to glean more info on that as well. Similarly for Rybka - fruit connection.
Same for Houdini. Robert has already stated his side, now others can prove/disprove if he is telling the truth.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with determining origin of engines. I would like to know origins of all popular engines -commercial, open source, free, public domain ...

You´re right Charles,

let me put it in a snappy form:
we are not against Houdini, that nice and innocent chess engine,
we are against its author lies.

Couldn't say it much better....
Dr.D

[BTO7]

What I don't understand is why so many on this forum are now hunting Robert Houdart.

Not hunting, just trying to find the truth, which Robert and Houdini are severely lacking! Robert is the biggest computer chess liar on the Internet...PERIOD !

Cordially,

Sean

Gentlemen

Robert Houdart owe's no explanation for anything to anyone it's that simple. His product is available for (free) those who choose to enjoy it. Robert has provided a certain amount of information concerning his product. Should some people still have problems with Houdini you must understand your complaints are worth what Robert charges for this engine. --- nothing---

I wonder if some of these people who consistently complain about Robert's excellent work actually have Houdini in their engine file. Using it for their analysis on annotated chess material and such. Because that would be rich.

Thank you

Dr. Ivannik

true, but people have a right to question the origins of engines.

In the beginning, I was outraged that discussions of Ippolit was pretty much banned in talk chess (moved to hidden forum). But, open chess should mean open discussion not blind support for any engine.
At least there is a report out on Ippolit origins -- I will like to to glean more info on that as well. Similarly for Rybka - fruit connection.
Same for Houdini. Robert has already stated his side, now others can prove/disprove if he is telling the truth.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with determining origin of engines. I would like to know origins of all popular engines -commercial, open source, free, public domain ...

You´re right Charles,

let me put it in a snappy form:
we are not against Houdini, that nice and innocent chess engine,
we are against its author lies.

What are you guys smoking around here ? What lies....here and i quote from the web page "Without many ideas from the excellent open source chess engines Ippolit/Robbolito, Stockfish and Crafty (in that order), Houdini would not nearly be as strong as it is now. " Ok what part of that does everyone NOT understand? This says.....its not 100% original...this also says ...its not 100% clone of one engine. Is it me or everyone just trying to start some kinda controversy ? So what LIES ??? and what is it everyone is after here ??? The engine is free ....customer service is excellent and Robert is one of the nicest authors thus far....what more does everyone want ? This is turning into a Jerry Springer freak show.

Regards
BT

[Sean Evans]

What I don't understand is why so many on this forum are now hunting Robert Houdart.

Not hunting, just trying to find the truth, which Robert and Houdini are severely lacking! Robert is the biggest computer chess liar on the Internet...PERIOD !

Cordially,

Sean

Gentlemen

Robert Houdart owe's no explanation for anything to anyone it's that simple. His product is available for (free) those who choose to enjoy it. Robert has provided a certain amount of information concerning his product. Should some people still have problems with Houdini you must understand your complaints are worth what Robert charges for this engine. --- nothing---

I wonder if some of these people who consistently complain about Robert's excellent work actually have Houdini in their engine file. Using it for their analysis on annotated chess material and such. Because that would be rich.

Thank you

Dr. Ivannik

true, but people have a right to question the origins of engines.

In the beginning, I was outraged that discussions of Ippolit was pretty much banned in talk chess (moved to hidden forum). But, open chess should mean open discussion not blind support for any engine.
At least there is a report out on Ippolit origins -- I will like to to glean more info on that as well. Similarly for Rybka - fruit connection.
Same for Houdini. Robert has already stated his side, now others can prove/disprove if he is telling the truth.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with determining origin of engines. I would like to know origins of all popular engines -commercial, open source, free, public domain ...

You´re right Charles,

let me put it in a snappy form:
we are not against Houdini, that nice and innocent chess engine,
we are against its author lies.

What are you guys smoking around here ? What lies....here and i quote from the web page "Without many ideas from the excellent open source chess engines Ippolit/Robbolito, Stockfish and Crafty (in that order), Houdini would not nearly be as strong as it is now. " Ok what part of that does everyone NOT understand? This says.....its not 100% original...this also says ...its not 100% clone of one engine. Is it me or everyone just trying to start some kinda controversy ? So what LIES ??? and what is it everyone is after here ??? The engine is free ....customer service is excellent and Robert is one of the nicest authors thus far....what more does everyone want ? This is turning into a Jerry Springer freak show.

Regards
BT

There is large difference from obtaining an idea and copying and pasting the majority of code in a program, i.e. another example of Roberts' lies!

[BTO7]

There is large difference from obtaining an idea and copying and pasting the majority of code in a program, i.e. another example of Roberts' lies!

Ok simple ...this falls under the NOT 100% original...also ...even if it was copied pasted (which Robert does not seem like the type to just copy paste) Ippo is open source ....correct ????? WHICH means its free to use ....right??? SO EVEN if he did copy some code whats the big deal ??? He's not claiming 100% originality RIGHT ? Also if he as he said took the full 1500 lines of code (from Ippo) then added 1000 more totaling 2500+ lines of code now in Houdini ....suddenly Ippo is barely half of what Houdini is ...AGAIN not a full copy. Kinda like what your boy VAS did taking fruit then adding to it ....course then he called it his own and sells it for money which is much worse. You guys are really too funny.....I got a solution for you .... .shelf Houdini and use other engines that don't bother you so much ...problem solved.

Regards
BT