Answers.Body: <p>Since your engine supports UCI, I would suggest checking out <a href="http://lichess.org" rel="nofollow noreferrer">lichess.org</a>. You can make a BOT account there and test against several other BOTs and people as well! Also, you can get your BOT rated in different time formats!!</p>
  <p>I must warn you that most of the BOTs on lichess are some version of StockFish or other strong engines but you can find ample other BOTs.</p>
  <p>Among strong BOTs (apart from Stockfish ones), I would suggest checking out:</p>
  <ol>
  <li><a href="https://lichess.org/@/LeelaChess" rel="nofollow noreferrer">LeelaChess</a>: A neural net based BOT.</li>
  <li><a href="https://lichess.org/@/UCIbot" rel="nofollow noreferrer">ASMFish</a></li>
  </ol>
  <p>There are many more BOTs on lichess, you can view them here on <a href="https://lichess.org/team/lichess-bots" rel="nofollow noreferrer">lichess BOT team</a>.</p>
  <p>You can also find many not so strong self-implemented engines that you might like testing against, for example <a href="https://lichess.org/@/TrolliumBot" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this</a>.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-07T02:30:43.640Z
Answers.Text: That seems particularly enticing!  Competing against a top-tier engine restricted to very little time is more appealing for obvious reasons, but I have concerns that the elo/give_time curve might not behave as I expect, and cause weird/undesirable results.
  
  When restricted to very little time, would top-tier engines play similarly to the less strong engines?
Answers.UserDisplayName: Sam Ragusa
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-07T07:03:03.477Z
Answers.Text: But both the BOTs will restricted to little time, right? So I guess the optimal BOT would search more depth than the weaker BOT doesn't matter the time. Regarding performance given low time, I would suggest checking out this video, where a human defeat a strong engine in hyperbullet match https://www.streamerclips.com/twitch/penguingm1/RefinedAverageLaptopRedCoat.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Laschet Jain
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-08-16T18:35:04.183Z
Answers.Text: Damn, I didn't knew you could setup a bot account there!
Answers.UserDisplayName: Fernando
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-08-16T18:36:04.293Z
Answers.Text: @Fernando This feature was added around 2 months ago.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Laschet Jain
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-08-16T18:37:25.213Z
Answers.Text: @LaschetJain I'm checking it right now, thank you!
Answers.UserDisplayName: Fernando
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-06T21:21:21.867Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2023-09-13T16:37:14.623Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2023-09-13T16:37:14.623Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Laschet Jain
Answers.Body: <p><a href="http://computer-chess.org/doku.php?id=computer_chess:wiki:lists:chess_engine_list" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://computer-chess.org/doku.php?id=computer_chess:wiki:lists:chess_engine_list</a></p>
  
  <ul>
  <li>Arasan</li>
  <li>GreKo</li>
  <li>Crafty</li>
  <li>Rodent</li>
  <li>Toga etc</li>
  </ul>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-06T16:26:18.600Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2018-07-06T16:26:18.600Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: SmallChess
Answers.Body: <p>To complement the list given by @SmallChess, you can find at <a href="https://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/</a> an ELO ranking of many chess engines.</p>
  
  <p>In the 2300-2600 range ("similar or a bit below a human master"), and amongst open-source engines, you have : </p>
  
  <ul>
  <li>K2 0.87 (2580 ELO)</li>
  <li>Jazz 840 64-bit 4CPU (2552 ELO)</li>
  <li>Maverick 1.5 64-bit (2522 ELO)</li>
  <li>Winter 0.1.1 64-bit (2492 ELO)</li>
  <li>Lozza 1.18 64-bit (2452 ELO)</li>
  <li>Topple 0.1.1 64-bit (2360 ELO)</li>
  </ul>
  
  <p>I haven't tested these engines myself, but they seem to fit your criterias.</p>
  
  <p><strong>Update</strong> : If you're looking more for engines in the 2000-2300 range, then these engines might suit you better : </p>
  
  <ul>
  <li>Absolute Zero 2.4.7.2 64-bit (ELO 2294)</li>
  <li>CT800 1.30 64-bit (ELO 2253)</li>
  <li>Zevra 1.8.4 r650 64-bit (ELO 2236)</li>
  <li>ZCT 0.3.2451 (ELO 2210)</li>
  <li>Tunguska 1.0 64-bit (ELO 2133)</li>
  <li>Cinnamon 2.0 64-bit (ELO 2054)</li>
  </ul>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-06T17:22:20.970Z
Answers.Text: Similar or a bit below human master would be 2000-2200 USCF or up to 2200-2300 FIDE.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Herb
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-06T17:43:29.780Z
Answers.Text: @HerbWolfe I interpreted "master" as GM level (2500-2600), and "a bit below" as FM to IM level (2300-2500). The original question is a little unclear on what "master" level mean exactly (I would have commented about it if I could). I'll update my answer anyway, but it would be best if the author could confirm what he meant exactly.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Umlin
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-07T02:37:58.773Z
Answers.Text: I left the term 'master' purposely vague, because my familiarity with ELOs and the level of play they represents is lacking.  I used just below a master level because my main point of reference is a friend who's rank is right below master (though I'm unsure what his actual ELO is).
  
  Either way, your summarized list of engine's is appreciated!
Answers.UserDisplayName: Sam Ragusa
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-06T17:12:13.053Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2018-07-06T17:51:31.257Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2018-07-06T17:51:31.257Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Umlin
Answers.Body: <p>Try <a href="https://github.com/fernandotenorio/Tunguska" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://github.com/fernandotenorio/Tunguska</a>
  And let me know if your Python engine beat mine! =D</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-08-16T18:36:50.153Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2018-08-16T18:36:50.153Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Fernando
Answers.Body: <blockquote>
  <p>StockFish is extremely good, and even given extremely little time will
  perform well. This makes it difficult to see the changes in the
  engine's strategy which resulted from a change in the engine's code</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>You can use <code>go depth x</code> or <code>go nodes y</code> to get Stockfish to almost arbitrary strength levels.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2023-03-14T11:24:10.093Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2023-03-14T11:24:10.093Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: gcp
Answers.Body: <blockquote>
  <p>StockFish is extremely good, and even given extremely little time will perform well. This makes it difficult to see the changes in the engine's strategy which resulted from a change in the engine's code</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>Aside from the mentioned UCI depth option, Stockfish also supports different playing strengths. See <a href="https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/29860/is-there-a-list-of-approximate-elo-ratings-for-each-stockfish-level">Is there a list of approximate Elo ratings for each Stockfish level?</a> for discussion on Elo.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2023-09-14T08:55:01.973Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2023-09-14T08:55:01.973Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: qwr
Answers.Body: <p>Here is a list of computer chess engine rankings.  Elo's are provided.</p>
  
  <p><a href="http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/</a></p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-08T07:44:52.873Z
Answers.Text: you post an URL that was already posted like 15 hours ago, what's the point?
Answers.UserDisplayName: lenik
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-08T15:03:51.053Z
Answers.Text: Guess I overlooked the original post.  People can do with the post as they like(ie reuse, remove because it is duplicated etc.)
Answers.UserDisplayName: hangejj
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-07-08T00:32:15.690Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2018-07-08T00:32:15.690Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: hangejj
Body: <p>I've built a chess engine in Python which I've been testing against StockFish through the use of the <a href="https://github.com/niklasf/python-chess" rel="noreferrer">Python-Chess</a> package.  </p>
  
  <p>Testing against StockFish seems/is problematic, and as a result I'm looking for suggestions of engines to test against.</p>
  
  <p>There are two major issues with testing against StockFish (the first much more significant than the next)</p>
  
  <ol>
  <li>StockFish is partially used in generating the training data for the engine's evaluation function.  </li>
  <li>StockFish is extremely good, and even given extremely little time will perform well.  This makes it difficult to see the changes in the engine's strategy which resulted from a change in the engine's code</li>
  </ol>
  
  <p>The engines I'm hoping to play against need to have no serious bugs or problems, and ideally would play at levels similar or a bit below a human master, without spending too much time running them.  UCI engines are prefered so that my engine can easily communicate with them through the Python-Chess API (note that this doesn't mean my engine supports UCI).</p>
  
  <p>If it helps anyone to have some context, my engine is <a href="https://github.com/SamRagusa/Batch-First" rel="noreferrer">Batch First</a>.</p>
  
Tags: <engines><stockfish><uci>
Title: Reasonable engines to test against (Not StockFish)
ThreadText: # Reasonable engines to test against (Not StockFish)
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2018-07-06)
  
  I've built a chess engine in Python which I've been testing against StockFish through the use of the [Python-Chess](https://github.com/niklasf/python-chess) package.
  
  Testing against StockFish seems/is problematic, and as a result I'm looking for suggestions of engines to test against.
  
  There are two major issues with testing against StockFish (the first much more significant than the next)
  
  1. StockFish is partially used in generating the training data for the engine's evaluation function.
  2. StockFish is extremely good, and even given extremely little time will perform well. This makes it difficult to see the changes in the engine's strategy which resulted from a change in the engine's code
  
  The engines I'm hoping to play against need to have no serious bugs or problems, and ideally would play at levels similar or a bit below a human master, without spending too much time running them. UCI engines are prefered so that my engine can easily communicate with them through the Python-Chess API (note that this doesn't mean my engine supports UCI).
  
  If it helps anyone to have some context, my engine is [Batch First](https://github.com/SamRagusa/Batch-First).
  
  **Tags:** engines, stockfish, uci
  
  
  ---
  
  ## 7 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2018-07-06. Score: 8 | Accepted answer
  
  Since your engine supports UCI, I would suggest checking out [lichess.org](http://lichess.org). You can make a BOT account there and test against several other BOTs and people as well! Also, you can get your BOT rated in different time formats!!
  
  I must warn you that most of the BOTs on lichess are some version of StockFish or other strong engines but you can find ample other BOTs.
  
  Among strong BOTs (apart from Stockfish ones), I would suggest checking out:
  
  1. [LeelaChess](https://lichess.org/@/LeelaChess): A neural net based BOT.
  2. [ASMFish](https://lichess.org/@/UCIbot)
  
  There are many more BOTs on lichess, you can view them here on [lichess BOT team](https://lichess.org/team/lichess-bots).
  
  You can also find many not so strong self-implemented engines that you might like testing against, for example [this](https://lichess.org/@/TrolliumBot).
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: That seems particularly enticing!  Competing against a top-tier engine restricted to very little time is more appealing for obvious reasons, but I have concerns that the elo/give_time curve might not behave as I expect, and cause weird/undesirable results.  When restricted to very little time, would top-tier engines play similarly to the less strong engines?  
  > **username_1**: But both the BOTs will restricted to little time, right? So I guess the optimal BOT would search more depth than the weaker BOT doesn't matter the time. Regarding performance given low time, I would suggest checking out this video, where a human defeat a strong engine in hyperbullet match https://www.streamerclips.com/twitch/penguingm1/RefinedAverageLaptopRedCoat.  
  > **username_2**: Damn, I didn't knew you could setup a bot account there!  
  > **username_1**: @username_2 This feature was added around 2 months ago.  
  > **username_2**: @LaschetJain I'm checking it right now, thank you!  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2018-07-06. Score: 3
  
  <http://computer-chess.org/doku.php?id=computer_chess:wiki:lists:chess_engine_list>
  
  * Arasan
  * GreKo
  * Crafty
  * Rodent
  * Toga etc
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2018-07-06. Score: 2
  
  To complement the list given by @username_3, you can find at <https://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/> an ELO ranking of many chess engines.
  
  In the 2300-2600 range ("similar or a bit below a human master"), and amongst open-source engines, you have :
  
  * K2 0.87 (2580 ELO)
  * Jazz 840 64-bit 4CPU (2552 ELO)
  * Maverick 1.5 64-bit (2522 ELO)
  * Winter 0.1.1 64-bit (2492 ELO)
  * Lozza 1.18 64-bit (2452 ELO)
  * Topple 0.1.1 64-bit (2360 ELO)
  
  I haven't tested these engines myself, but they seem to fit your criterias.
  
  **Update** : If you're looking more for engines in the 2000-2300 range, then these engines might suit you better :
  
  * Absolute Zero 2.4.7.2 64-bit (ELO 2294)
  * CT800 1.30 64-bit (ELO 2253)
  * Zevra 1.8.4 r650 64-bit (ELO 2236)
  * ZCT 0.3.2451 (ELO 2210)
  * Tunguska 1.0 64-bit (ELO 2133)
  * Cinnamon 2.0 64-bit (ELO 2054)
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_5**: Similar or a bit below human master would be 2000-2200 USCF or up to 2200-2300 FIDE.  
  > **username_4**: @username_5Wolfe I interpreted "master" as GM level (2500-2600), and "a bit below" as FM to IM level (2300-2500). The original question is a little unclear on what "master" level mean exactly (I would have commented about it if I could). I'll update my answer anyway, but it would be best if the author could confirm what he meant exactly.  
  > **username_0**: I left the term 'master' purposely vague, because my familiarity with ELOs and the level of play they represents is lacking.  I used just below a master level because my main point of reference is a friend who's rank is right below master (though I'm unsure what his actual ELO is).  Either way, your summarized list of engine's is appreciated!  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2018-08-16. Score: 1
  
  Try <https://github.com/fernandotenorio/Tunguska>
  And let me know if your Python engine beat mine! =D
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_6 on 2023-03-14. Score: 1
  
  > StockFish is extremely good, and even given extremely little time will
  > perform well. This makes it difficult to see the changes in the
  > engine's strategy which resulted from a change in the engine's code
  
  You can use `go depth x` or `go nodes y` to get Stockfish to almost arbitrary strength levels.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_7 on 2023-09-14. Score: 0
  
  > StockFish is extremely good, and even given extremely little time will perform well. This makes it difficult to see the changes in the engine's strategy which resulted from a change in the engine's code
  
  Aside from the mentioned UCI depth option, Stockfish also supports different playing strengths. See [Is there a list of approximate Elo ratings for each Stockfish level?](https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/29860/is-there-a-list-of-approximate-elo-ratings-for-each-stockfish-level) for discussion on Elo.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_8 on 2018-07-08. Score: -1
  
  Here is a list of computer chess engine rankings. Elo's are provided.
  
  <http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/>
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_9**: you post an URL that was already posted like 15 hours ago, what's the point?  
  > **username_8**: Guess I overlooked the original post.  People can do with the post as they like(ie reuse, remove because it is duplicated etc.)  
  
  ---
  
  