Can there be more than 1 solution to a puzzle?

Aye, okay, whatever...  Kids should be told that they 'failed' for being good.  They should be perfect and not fail... 

I hope YOU don't have kids...  What a terrible message you're sending them...  Awful...

I got a tactic "wrong" yesterday because my move was .02 worse than the correct move.  Even though both lead to mate.

Sir... the aim of a chess puzzle is to get you to find the BEST move. Not a good move, or an OK one, but the best.

If you fail to do so, then you must try harder next time.

In your world no one would learn because a lot of second rate moves would be rewarded.

Then I would say the puzzles are doing exactly what they are meant to do. They are meant to be difficult. Getting it wrong is SUPPOSED to be frustrating. What good would coaching or teaching do if getting it wrong wasn't a big deal? Good coaches don't say "it's ok, you'll do better next time." They coach like there is no next time. They train you to be the best, not "good". 

If you lost 240 points then you are now where you are supposed to be. Don't be upset you were doing puzzles that were beyond your ability. Be thankful for it. Now you have a better understanding of what it takes to get those more difficult problems right. That's exactly how you get better. 

Sorry, some of the comments here are total rubbish and wrong-headed.

The purpose of puzzles, or any kind of learning is for one to improve.  This is fine as a concept and if one is totally wrong this is fair enough.

No-one however is encouraged to learn by being penalised for being 'good' at something - just not the best which is apparently a 'fail'.  It is just off-putting to the learner, and some people of-course will never be the 'best', just simply 'good' which apparently is also a failure...

Learning should not be 'frustrating' in any setting.  Frustration does not lead to improvement for most people, but rather to giving up on learning process altogether.

One contributor seems to think that telling kid that they're a failure is a good strategy.  I can confirm that this is not a good strategy at all for encouraging any child, or indeed adult learner.

Additionally, any coach in my experience would indeed reward and congratulate a student for 'good' move.  They would not penalise a student for a less than 'best' move, however point this out in a constructive manner.  Penalising someone just encaourages disengagement be it chess, a language or any form of learning.

You want to be rewarded and congratulated?  Go play t-ball, where everyone is a winner!

You want to get better at chess and life?  Suck it up buttercup.  Learn to accept defeat, and that second best is not always acceptable.

That comment was VERY constructive.  What a totally nice person you apparently are..! This is the encouragement you give is it?  Bet you've got lots of pals... NOT...

That is the only sentence in your pathetic diatribe that makes any sense at all.

Yeah, and your the one that still apparently thinks that telling a child their a failure is a good idea.  Like I'm going to listen to you for advice.  Okay hun...

Regarding your last sentence. If you are worried that penalizing encourages disengagement then chess (and most things in life) aren't for you. It's actually the risk of penalty that drives improvement. What reason is there to improve if there is no penalty for not doing it? The incentive isn't just getting better or winning, the incentive is also to not be penalized. They are arguably the same thing. 

Imagine your puzzle rating if chess.com did away with the penalties. So that people wouldn't become disengaged. How long would it take before you were getting 3000 rate puzzles right every time? I have a feeling your puzzle rating is EXACTLY where it should be. You can thank chess.com for that. 

You want things sugar coated then by some cereal.  You want the truth?  Them im your man.  No one is saying to tell someone they are a failure if they get a tactic wrong.  But be mature enough to handle criticism.

Criticism should be indeed constructive, and you're not the latter.  At all.

Ignore the troll

There was one of those maths problems on facebook yesterday (the type that regularly crop up). One respondent got it wrong and then claimed it was really rude and offensive that folk pointed out their lack of maths knowledge.  Same mentality.... "I don't really want to learn, I just want everyone to think I am doing OK, even though I am not"

This is where you are going wrong.  Should doctors be "rewarded" for doing a "good" open heart surgery, and not the best one they are capable of?

maybe we should also reward police, firefighters, teachers, and chess coaches for doing a "good" job, and not the best job they can do.  I mean why try harder if good is going to be good enough.

You mean ignore you right?  Hiding under your bridge, popping out on the forum now and then to be negative, and dump on someone with a perfectly valid opinion..?  Oh, and also to tell kids, or indeed any new learner, that they're a failure for being 'good', just not 'perfect'.  That kind of troll.... Got it.

Grow up.

Just another snowflake that feels they are "entitled" to be a winner. 

Cant stand to be criticized. 

Needs to be rewarded for everything.

All criticism is constructive. It's up to you how you want to use it. Now insults and attacks and all that don't seem very constructive. But there is always a kernel of truth in those mean hateful things. 

The point is chess.com is trying to make you a better chess player. They do that by being mean. They penalize you when you do something you feel is right. That hurts your feelings, it seems wrong, it's not fair, etc. 

But that's exactly how you get better. You overcome unfairness. You turn your hurt feelings into motivation to get better. You examine WHY it was wrong, etc. 

It doesn't make sense to award points (or not penalize, same thing) for puzzles that are above your ability. You will never improve if you are rewarded for doing something you arent capable of. You will feel better temporarily, with an artificially high rating. But what happens when you try to use this newfound artificial rating? You play someone with a similar rating (who actually DOES have that ability). You will lose, and not understand why. 

Just be grateful that chess.com has devised a system that actually helps you improve. And if you don't improve, if the puzzles are just too difficult, that's ok. You've hit a plateau. Everyone will eventually do that eventually. But just because you have stopped improving doesn't mean everyone else has to. Everyone else is benefitting from the same system that may or may not benefit you. 

Wasting our collective breath. He does not want to learn, just is offended by being told he got the wrong answer.

This is perhaps the problem.  This is not policing, surgery, firefighting or indeed any other life and death activity.,,  Its just a game... 

Being good at a game (which really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things) shouldn't be penalised just because one isn't 'perfect'...

I'm not after 'super max points' just not to be marked down for finding a good move, rather than the 'super absolute best ever move'...

Clearly when I teach my class (not Chess obviously), rather than encourage and support my students, I should berate them for being butter-cups that can't handle it, when they don't achieve perfection..!