Very impressive Jay.... I'm "stuck" near 1600
What The Hell

Yesterday I Reached `1750 In Chess.com Puzzles And Today I Reached 1900!! What The Heck I Gained 384 Points Of Puzzles
I had the opposite problem .... I lost 500 points over 9 days, in multiple sessions, and have worked my way back up some

Yesterday I Reached `1750 In Chess.com Puzzles And Today I Reached 1900!! What The Heck I Gained 384 Points Of Puzzles
I had the opposite problem .... I lost 500 points over 9 days, in multiple sessions, and have worked my way back up some
umm try the best

Yesterday I Reached `1750 In Chess.com Puzzles And Today I Reached 1900!! What The Heck I Gained 384 Points Of Puzzles
I had the opposite problem .... I lost 500 points over 9 days, in multiple sessions, and have worked my way back up some
For me, the design of the puzzle system could be improved a lot. Say in an example, there's 15 points assigned to a puzzle. To get +15 points, you have to do the puzzle under the target time. If you get the first move wrong, you get -15 points. Due to this, it's easy to lose hundreds of points on relatively few puzzles. Clawing these points back is slow if you only get 70% of the target time. A fairer system for me would to not penalise people so much for getting the puzzle wrong. Only the equivalent for doing the puzzle correctly, but slowly. I.e., +/- 5 points. Can still reward people for doing the puzzles super quickly, with an extra 10 points. How many people are really getting under the target time? I have no idea how those are set. Personally I have to spend several minutes per puzzle usually.

Nice curse in the title. Tone it down a bit.
Wow, I haven't seen an overreaction like that since my parents confiscated my copy of the Eagles' Hotel California album, just because in the song "Life in the Fast Lane" they use the word "goddamn". Destructive, filthy-mouthed, troublemaking punks, those Eagles.

Nice curse in the title. Tone it down a bit.
Wow, I haven't seen an overreaction like that since my parents confiscated my copy of the Eagles' Hotel California album, just because in the song "Life in the Fast Lane" they use the word "goddamn". Destructive, filthy-mouthed, troublemaking punks, those Eagles.
I haven’t seen someone not get a joke as simple as that in quite a while.

For me, the design of the puzzle system could be improved a lot. Say in an example, there's 15 points assigned to a puzzle. To get +15 points, you have to do the puzzle under the target time. If you get the first move wrong, you get -15 points. Due to this, it's easy to lose hundreds of points on relatively few puzzles. Clawing these points back is slow if you only get 70% of the target time. A fairer system for me would to not penalise people so much for getting the puzzle wrong. Only the equivalent for doing the puzzle correctly, but slowly. I.e., +/- 5 points. Can still reward people for doing the puzzles super quickly, with an extra 10 points. How many people are really getting under the target time? I have no idea how those are set. Personally I have to spend several minutes per puzzle usually.
Target times are based on others solving the puzzles and change over time. I'm not sure losing less points on a failure is a good idea; puzzles are already really inflated, compared to other playing pools (with all the caveats of comparisons across pools). Can't image how much more inflated they'd get by decreasing losses.

Martin can you tell me about the chess.com rules?
There used to be a good support article on the tactics system, but over the years it has changed to not provide as many details. As far as I'm aware, the system works essentially the same way as it always has, just the underlying way tactics scoring works has been tweaked.
Yesterday I Reached `1750 In Chess.com Puzzles And Today I Reached 1900!! What The Heck I Gained 384 Points Of Puzzles