puzzles don’t help you very much actually…

Actually the OP is wrong!

Some people deserve to be put down and should be!

I disagree on the wording here. If someone is prideful, then yes, they should be brought down and humbled. Perhaps this seems technical, but I don't believe that this is identical to "put down." Putting down someone sounds like degrading or humiliating and this is from the wrong mindset. The correct mindset should be helping people and not "putting them down."

I will grant you that puzzles don't help very much if you grant me the caveat that they are entertaining and fun

His case was tired

Puzzle are good if you really try to calculate.

For me, it increase pattern recognition and help to understand why a move and not another move.

btw, it helped my rating increase.

The cons about puzzle, is what the author mentioned, sometime you don't see the tactic even you did recognize in a puzzle.

But I want to say, if you didn't see the tactic at first in a puzzle by example, how you're suppose to know this tactic exist ?
You don't need puzzle, if you're a god of chess, but who are?

It like saying, you don't need opening chess preparation because if peopled deviate from the theory you know, you're lost. it's right and wrong.

Most of the puzzles here are taken from actual games.

But not acutal games. We need acutal games

Actually they do to help pattern recognition as part of a training program. I prefer ones that are fairly realistic compositions, endgame studies and, of course, ones from actual games. Even the real bizarre ones have some value.

Thoroughly read what others are saying.

You could argue that this is the effect of playing too few puzzles, not too many.

Puzzles teach you to not play random aggressive moves, instead only play the move that works.

Also, is there such a thing as "too many puzzles"? I don't think so. I know that the Polgar sisters solved dozens of tactics puzzles every day, and I bet that most GMs did it too when they were kids. I doubt that any one of your club mates comes close.

👍👍👍

Mic drop!

You got "schooled" by Martin_Stahl in the second set of comments in case you missed it. He's pretty good at setting people straight. Do yourself a favor and don't argue with him.

To a hammer, every problem has the shape of a nail.

Puzzles, like many other things, do "teach" you and the good.... and the bad. It can mislead you into "seeing" tactical patterns in every single position you play, when, actually, position having tactics that are not out of reach (within limited time) of a player, are not so many.

Also, Puzzles can teach you the Pinocchio lie that, because it does display some four digit number falsely labelled "rating", this should be your actual value as a chess player. Or chess tactician.

And dang so many other things blah blah blah.

How can someone "see" a tactical pattern that isn't there? It's completely impossible unless you miscalculate something.

And you know what's the best tool against miscalculating things? Solving puzzles.

How can someone see what is not here? See wikipedia/dictionaries pages about what: illusions, hallucinations, wishfull thinking, denials, optical illusions and other such related things I may forget..

Good read.

You must feel clever for the cute trick that you omitted half of my message.

As I said, "you know what's the best tool against miscalculating things? Solving puzzles."

Nope, I just had nothing to say about that specific part. (since I spoke out my mind about it already)

Well, you're educated enough to understand you've made two distinct parts in your post, that are sure somehow related, but also independent from each other, and that one may reply to one of the two parts alone without it being any trick of any kind.