Some of the puzzles make no sense.

Who creates these puzzles? And why is there no option to explain why you'd want the end result he puzzle has you achieve? Plus, if you accidentally press next, the puzzle is gone forever so you can't sit there and study it. I would assume the puzzle would want to walk you through obtaining check or at least severally handicapping your opponent. Some of them just seem like random trades. I've noticed when reviewing a game, the computer will change its answer periodically. Is the same computer creating these puzzles? Some puzzles are pretty simple. Then others make me lose interest in playing as they don't make sense and there is no way to receive an explanation.

Most of the puzzle I have done make sense. But if you have a specific question, you could look at the analysis or post the link to the puzzle in the forums and ask.

Generally speaking a puzzle will either

• Mate
• Lead to an unstoppable mate, though it may stop beforehand due to multiple winning lines
• Gain a material advantage
• Equalize in a position when down material, possibly through a forced stalemate or triple repetition of position line

Thanks Martin, I just found the analysis button. Never noticed it prior.

If I failed to copy and save the link, is there a way to search by puzzle number?

There is also a comment button per puzzle -- looks like a cloud. If I find a puzzle problematic in some way, there are often relevant or sympathetic comments.

The problem I really have with them is that some of them only work when the opposing side makes a nonsensical move no one would ever predict. Like how am I supposed to know that part of the puzzle is the opposition making a mistake with their queen?

I agree. Many times the last move by the computer is to place their queen directly next to my king which then simply takes the queen. Sometimes the only way to "win" the puzzle is to anticipate a terrible move by the computer. Frustrating

Probably the "terrible move" is just the only viable option for your opponent. That's what i think at least. The analysis usually vote all of them "best move" so...

I used to have this thought. But truly there always has been a best move in every single puzzle I have ever done, since I check with the computer when they seem to not make sense. That’s another thing that separates puzzles from normal game, there always is a best move, so if two moves seem equal, then one of them actually is better or they are both wrong.

My understanding is that the puzzles are pulled from actual games where a player played the best move according to the engine. Most of the time when I think the puzzle is wrong it is because I missed something. But there are some puzzles that objectively make no sense. Chess.com says that a certain percentage of puzzles have not been vetted. When you attempt one of these puzzles you will be awarded a point even if you get it wrong. I assume that when enough people flag a puzzle as inaccurate they review it.

Update. The more I have played the puzzles, (and according to my year end summary I am in the top 1% for the amount of puzzles played this past year) the more I realized that what I perceived to be a flaw in the logic in the solution was actually my inability to correctly analyze the position. , I also have learned that becoming proficient at puzzles won't stop you from blundering in a game. IMHO, there is no substitute for playing actual games against other human beings. Chess is fun because it is difficult. If it were easy, it wouldn't be fun.