Why do puzzles show opponent's last move?

Does anyone else have an issue with this? I'm curious why the puzzles on Chess.com always begin by showing the opponent's move. By no means all the time, but in the vast majority of puzzles, the opponent's move is a mistake of some kind, exposing a weakness in their position. So, effectively, the puzzles begin with a hint. And frankly the move is sometimes a dead giveaway. This is not how puzzles have traditionally been presented, for instance in puzzle books. I'd rather just have a static position to solve without knowing the opponent's last move. Why don't they just show the position after the move? Is there a way to disable this?

No, you can't disable it. Generally speaking, that move is the blunder that allows the tactic and gives some indication of what is happening. In some instances, it may be required, such as the car of a possible en passant.

The last move is not that much of a hint even when it is a blunder. Tactics commonly follow errors or every game would be a draw. And (almost?) all chess.com's puzzles are taken from actual games - probably unlike those in your puzzle book. Chess.com puzzles are therefore quite different from compositions which are artificially constructed. And those have different solving rules like they do not depend on FENs or last move indications for en passant moves!

I still feel it should be optional. The user should have the choice of disabling the first move, making it a bit more challenging. And as I said in my first post, the first move is sometimes a dead giveaway to the solution. You know that either the moved piece's new position or the square it vacated is the key to the solution. The Daily Puzzle always presents a static position, so why not the other puzzles? Though the Daily Puzzle always has a clue in the title. I don't get Chess.com's compulsion to constantly give hints to their puzzles. Are they concerned that it might turn people off if there's more of a challenge?

Incidentally, many puzzle books take their positions from actual games. I've never cared much for the artificial compositions.

I guess my beef is that there should be an option to turn off the first move and just show the position after that move. Doesn't seem like too much to ask.

In this case, some puzzles (the en passant ones) will become unsolvable. Is it okay for you?

It wouldn't bother me if there was an *option* for other people ("don't show first move in puzzles", for example), but for me, the only point of puzzles is to improve at chess, and in every chess game I've played, I always get to see my opponent's previous move.

To me, the strange puzzles are the Daily Puzzles, when you can NOT see the opponent's previous move. They feel like compositions rather than positions from games, partly due to the lack of a previous move.

It is interesting you are bothered by the mouse snacking in the corner while you ignore the lion consuming your dog. The big problem is that chess.com plays the moves for your opponent which is the ultimate no-no in puzzle solving. In a real puzzle you always have to find the best play for both sides. Chess.com's puzzle interface is simply awful for this and other reasons, so awful that everyone rather denies it and climbs on chairs for the terrible mouse.

Yes, but you don't know that the move is a mistake. Most of the time it isn't. If it is a mistake, you might spot it, or you might not. Your opponent doesn't announce "I just made a mistake. Can you see why?" In traditional static puzzles, you know there's a weakness in your opponent's position (otherwise it wouldn't be a tactical problem) but you don't know where the weakness is. You have to find it. That's the extra effort that Chess.com (and Lichess for that matter) is taking away by making the opponent's first move. And as Arisktotle points out, it gets even easier as the interface makes all your opponents moves, meaning there are fewer variations to calculate.

Good point. I didn't consider that. There's less calculation involved. It's all to easy, that's why the user should have options!

Some puzzles are to show a particular pattern. The first move is always going to be the same and you should still calculate all replies to make sure your move is best. But not everyone is going to think a particular defensive line is best and they'll ask about different defenses; some defenses may be harder for some players to solve than others.

Some puzzle positions are in the system multiple times with different defenses.

In the site puzzles it's still the same. The last move was a mistake but you still have to figure out why and it's not always obvious.

The solver has to find the best play for both sides, but that has nothing to do with the fact that the opponent in puzzles doesn't always play the best move.

The talk about people climbing on chairs and denying things is utter nonsense as is the rest of the comment. What we actually see is people making all sorts of excuses for failing to solve a puzzle, like "the opponent could have made a better move", which is completely irrelevant.

"Most of the time it isn't."

False. The previous move is invariably a mistake, usually going from a won or equal position to a losing one. Sometimes the winning tactic is already a possibility and the previous move fails to defend against it.

"And as Arisktotle points out, it gets even easier as the interface makes all your opponents moves, meaning there are fewer variations to calculate."

It doesn't mean that at all--you have to do the calculation before you see the opponent's move, otherwise your move is liable to be unsound.

And how else would the interface work? You find the best move in the initial position, and then you are presented with another position resulting from a move by the opponent. It can't show you all the different possible moves by the opponent and require you to respond to each; that would be unwieldy. If you want to see the entire game tree, use the analysis board.

Chess problem composition is an art and all the best problems are carefully composed. You may be talking about instruction books that contain position puzzles intended to illustrate tactics. Even there they are often composed to eliminate extranea.

Everyone has beefs. They are generally "too much to ask" as they have a cost. And this is the wrong place to complain ... talk to support.