Positional-style chess engines

[picarito]

Hello everyone, I would like to know your opinion about which are the positional style chess engines, it doesn't matter (a list if possible). Thanks in advance

[dkappe]

Hello everyone, I would like to know your opinion about which are the positional style chess engines, it doesn't matter (a list if possible). Thanks in advance

Probably my choices of the most positional engines are fairly obscure:

1. Stockfish
2. Dragon
3. Lc0

[BrendanJNorman]

Hello everyone, I would like to know your opinion about which are the positional style chess engines, it doesn't matter (a list if possible). Thanks in advance

Probably my choices of the most positional engines are fairly obscure:

1. Stockfish
2. Dragon
3. Lc0

I wouldn't put Stockfish in the positional category because even though it *can* do positional stuff better than everyone else, it tends to learn toward more dynamic options if given the choice.

Dragon and Lc0 are certainly positional, but you know what? Your "Frosty" net is even more positional than both of them! It's great.

Note: I'm assuming that "positional" (an oft thrown around, but not often understood term) means that "in a position where there are both dynamic (pawn storm, kingside concentration of pieces, pawn/piece sacrifice, etc) and static (improve pawn structure, control a critical line, restrict an enemy piece/s, organise and secure a knight outpost, etc) options, both of which are worth about the same, the player chooses the static option more often than not.

[supersharp77]

Hello everyone, I would like to know your opinion about which are the positional style chess engines, it doesn't matter (a list if possible). Thanks in advance

"Positional Style Chess Engines"...Well let me try and put in my two cents...

Fritz 6
Deep Hiarcs 14
Hiarcs 14
Learning Toga
Chessmaster Nimzo
Fruit 2.3.1
Tomitank Chess
Arasan
Andscacs
Loop
Brainfish
Colossus
Crafty
Deep Sjeng 2010
Deep Sjeng 2008
Der Bringer
Komodo 2 to Komodo 11
ExChess
Franchesca
Giraffe
Alfil
Greko
Knightcap
Naum
Phalanx
OldBlindDog
Rodent
Rybka
Smarthink
SlowChess
Szint Petrosian
Szint Karpov
Vajolet

[Frank Quisinsky]

Hi there,

"Positional Chess" is the highly complicated topic.

I have also the opinion: Stockfish, Komodo and Lc0!

But the list of supersharp77 is interesting.

Phalanx is more the attacker.
Same for Rodent.

But all the other can play great positional chess.
Hiarcs and SmarThink, Giraffe and Sjeng have very fine positional ideas I think.
Engines often with strategical ideas, for humans to see.

Slow and Arasan are more the "Allrounder", same for Andscacs.

Not easy the question!
All the time I have biggest problems to made a good classification tot he topic "Positional chess".
Here I am never sure!

Need many statistics + grandmaster level to say more I think.

Best
Frank

[mclane]

LC0

[Sopel]

Fat Titz 2 is the best positional engine that I know of

[Dicaste]

Context is missing if you ask me. I don't describe moves like positional and tactics. From my understanding positional style chess engine just that picks a move(s) that includes long term plan/idea instead of short one or better which includes BOTH. In my opinion Lc0 and Fat Titz(at really high depth) does that.

[Vernon Crawford]

Fat Titz 2 is the best positional engine that I know of

Serious?
I believe they're referring to unique & original engines, not a cheap stockfish clone with gimmick huge nnue...

[Vernon Crawford]

Hello everyone, I would like to know your opinion about which are the positional style chess engines, it doesn't matter (a list if possible). Thanks in advance

The whole 'positional' thing is a purely human construct.
Maybe you mean 'human-like'...which certainly means 800-2000 Elo weaker (in line with human strength) than todays engines.
It's amusing to see engine authors (supported by their ignorant fan-boys) claiming their engine plays more human-like?
and even funnier...that it's a desirable thing?

There exists an empirical 'truth' in computer chess...top engine are getting stronger and stronger, in an effort to approach it.
Funny that engine authors with much weaker programs, that are much farther from the 'truth', frequently resort to spinning their engine as playing more human, or with a Tal-like style
What a bunch of nonsense...

Want a human-like engine?
Simply choose one that plays around the human elo average...on chess.com that's probably around 1500!
all the rest is bunk...

2800+ elo engines (especially if cloned from SF, Cfish, Fruit, whatever)... do not play more human-like in any way shape or form.
Don't let those desperate for recognition fool you.