Simple mate in two puzzle rated 3200?

https://www.chess.com/puzzles/problem/1092678

Chess.com, you have some explaining to do.

Huh

I had a back ranker that was 2000

Probably people doing it quickly and missing the white queen on the a8-h1 diagonal. 

people playing qxf2 kh1 qxg2 maybe

that is indeed a stupid puzzle. who in the world would play 1. Re7 while 1. Qd8# basically ruins the black's mate in 2 scenario????? lol

This is a great puzzle on the 800 rating level! But at 3200 it is completely ridiculous. Don't buy any rationalization to justify it!

BTW, 73% solved it, 27% failed. I guess that ranks the average solver strength of the puzzlers at about 3500. Where do you find 4000 solvers at that average level ????

No everyone, u guys are all wrong. I think chesscom misrated the puzzle to 3200. It shows it is a 386 rated puzzle. It is too dumb for 3200 level. At the real 3200 level I doubt few of u guys can solve it. If u are rated above 1500, then u might have a tiny chance to solve any puzzle above the 3000 level. Yeah

I mean in this post everyone is very advanced chess players so I guess 3000 puzzles aren’t that hard for u guys. I regularly solve these puzzles but they often take me minutes to solve.

Understand that this puzzle is not really on a 3000 level but has currently settled on 386 so most chessplayers can solve and discuss it. Note that the first move is not part of the puzzle to be solved.

In general solving time increases at higher rating levels. Strong players can calculate deeper which means they have to assess many more moves on a hard puzzle than weaker players on a simpler puzzle. That takes time. I commonly spend like 10-15 minutes on the 3000 rated puzzle level but I require just a few seconds for puzzles around 1000. Even weaker players will not need 10 minutes since their capacity for making calculations is quickly exhausted. They solve it in a minute or they fail.

.

There is a trap. Qxf2+ and Qg2+ don't work. 380 rating is way too low for any puzzle with a trap.

But is it true that this was initially rated 3200? If yes, chess.com staff should find the guy who did that and fire him.

I often advised chess.com to fire some staff but for some reason they don't listen to me. Wonder what it is .....

What a bizarre statement.