Are the puzzles solutions always correct?

Hi, I spend most of my time doing puzzles because of my limited free time. However, sometimes I question the puzzle solutions. Especially a recent one where I had a checkmate and it wanted me to do something else. Most of the time I assume the puzzles are correct since I'm a novice, but what is the consensus? Are they incorrect at times?

Almost 100% time, yes - puzzle solutions are correct.  There are an extremely small number of puzzles which may slip through that have more than one correct solution or otherwise are not a proper puzzle.

In almost all cases, when someone thinks a puzzle solution is incorrect (or thinks there is an equally viable alternative), that person is missing something.  I encourage you to use the Analysis on all puzzles where you don't understand the solution (or why your move wasn't the best move).

If you do happen to come across a puzzle and - after plenty of analysis and diligent work - determine the puzzle is incorrect, the puzzle can be reported: https://support.chess.com/article/1223-how-do-i-report-a-bad-puzzle

If you can find the puzzle which confused you, please feel free to share here or elsewhere in the forums; this is the best way to really break down a puzzle since plenty of people on here will be eager to help you out

Agree with Alramech regarding the puzzles posted by chess.com. The puzzles posted by individual users (for example in this forum) vary in qualty and are not guaranteed to be correct. (This is not intended to diss or discourage anyone from posting a puzzle ^^)

Considering how easy it is to invoke the Analysis function to test a puzzle, I would certainly encourage people to stop posting puzzles when they are too lazy to verify them. Puzzles represent the logical perfection in chess and incorrect puzzles have no business existing here or anywhere. Besides the occasional mishap that is.

# 4 Certainly, it would be best if people at least attempt to verify their puzzles first (I'm not sure if all users have unlimitedaccess to analysis. However, the process of making a puzzle is didactic in itself, so I wouldn't want to discourage anyone from trying to make one: it's beneficial for the maker as well as the solver. From the solver's perspective, it can be beneficial to think about refutations, etc. That way, even an imperfect puzzle can lead to useful discussion. Of course, you're right that some good faith effort is required on the part of the puzzle maker for this to work. Personally, I don't mind the occasional error in this forum too much, partly because there are plenty of other resources (both on chess.com and elsewhere).

Yay mobile typing :D Just pretend that the parenthesis closed after "analysis".

There is no virtue in attempting to verify - only in verifying. Analysis is available to everyone.

Make all the puzzles you want. Just don't post them - until you performed the minimal actions of quality control. Otherwise go to chesskids; it is for fooling around.

#7 I'm not too keen on demanding perfection from other people's free labor, nor on setting conditions on where and how they should post it. Regardless, the OP has been sufficiently answered and this is now a separate discussion I'm not too interested in.

No you are not because you do not understand what a puzzle is. There are puzzles on many levels and of all kinds of make-up. But there are no incorrect puzzles in the same way that there is no incorrect mathematics. All mathematics is either correct or it is no mathematics at all. Correctness - or soundness as we commonly refer to it - is the starting point for puzzles. Those who don't get that should be involved in playing chess games and other forms of free labor but not in chess puzzles. 

OK man. At this point you seem to be responding to someone or something in your head and not to me. I never argued on the inherent property of correctness of puzzles - only on the inevitable human error. You also haven't acknowledged any of my other points or addressed the OP. I suggest you make another post if you want to talk about your frustrations. This isn't the place. For the record I think you severely underestimate the amount of testing a puzzle requires: if chess.com puzzles (and other sources) can sometimes get it wrong, expecting otherwise from individual users is a bit ridiculous.

Inevitable human error exists and is respected. In the old days it was a really good excuse for many errors in puzzles. Not any more. The majority of errors on this forum come from pure laziness. I am a super tester and know very well how much and which testing is required to verify puzzles. It can be a lot for puzzles outside the engine/tablebase range like the ones made by illbtu. For 98% of the puzzles the testing process consists of no more than hitting the Analysis button, walking through the moves and reading out the results. I am completely unimpressed by calls on free labor or difference in user skill to justify skipping such simple steps. 

Driving a car is not that hard but designing a car is. If you don't have the skill don't make cars, just drive them. Stick to solving puzzles when you don't have the skill and talent to design them. Having a social medium at your disposal is no excuse to mess it up.

Btw, I once walked through the 2007-2010 posts in this forum and found the puzzles are much better (on the average) than the more recent ones. In the early days many posters were aware they had no talent for creating puzzles and stuck to citing and discussing puzzles from the professional archives with millions of valid and exciting challenges. Such that everyone could enjoy them, learn from them and occasionally become a puzzle maker himself.