Puzzle Scoring

I'm relatively new to chess and have been working on puzzles to improve my ability to understand and play tactics.

A question about the scoring of puzzles. It looks like that if you get the first move correct, but then make errors with subsequent moves, you get some points, but not all of them. If you get the first move wrong, you lose all the points. Is that right?

Hi,

Yes, that seems right, as chess.com grades you on both your timing and accuracy.

Yes, puzzles are an effective training method. Beth Harmon is just a fictional character.

I've found the puzzles to be very helpful in my learning. I sure can't solve them in the suggested time limits, but over the past few months, I've seen a lot of improvement in how I can recognize different patterns and attacks.

I was wondering if others find they are much better at puzzles than games, or vice versa. I'm over 1500 at puzzles but only 1245 at rapid. My theory is that with puzzles you know there is a clever move available to mate or win material, while in a game you can't be certain that move exists.

"puzzle elo" doesn't exist, if you complete the puzzle, chess.com gives you points, otherwise you lose points. that's it. there is no correlation between your puzzle rating and your chess rating. 

In fact a lot of people have 5000+ in puzzles, here's the link of the rankings in the puzzle category https://www.chess.com/leaderboard/tactics

I can see that you're correct in that there's no maximum to a puzzle rating, but it's also true that you gain elo points if you win a game, and lose points if you lose. Even if there isn't a one-to-one relationship between game and puzzle ratings, there must be some relationship.

the problem is that for the chess rating, you have to play against people of your level. for puzzles, at some point they become the same difficult over and over and you can take all the time you need to solve them... so i don't know, there is some correlation because i highly doubt someone rated 400 can solve very difficult puzzles.. but the correlation ends there..

I don't know what is regarded as a difficult puzzle, but I am only rated 550 is in Rapid, but am 1000-1100 in puzzles. I do find the puzzle scoring very frustrating and somewhat demotivating as I get almost 60% correct, but my rating doesn't improve due to the way the scoring system works; 3 steps forward for giant leaps backwards

It depends on the difficulty of the specific Puzzle. If the rating of the Puzzle is high you will also get some points if you do not solve it 100% correct. If it is an easy one you will have to solve it 100% correct; otherwise you will lose points. 

Hey, I just beat Julia (1800). I wish I could say it was because of tactical brilliance, but we were headed for a draw and she blundered on a crucial move, allowing me to queen a pawn. I was so nervous about not stalemating, blundering or mouse slipping, it took me another 20 moves to checkmate her.

That's excellent, GrunkleMike! I'm still working on getting past Nelson.

Puzzles don't have much correlation to your game rating. Mine is almost 1000 more than my rapid rating. Just use it as a self-assessment tool for your own improvement. 

,pozdrav svima

I found Nelson is all Queen, no game. I can generally beat Nelson after a strategic queen trade but I'm not a very good player and I'm sure there are more elegant solutions from those more capable

"Puzzles" back then were something different from the puzzles on chess websites.  Back in the old days, chess puzzles were composed logic puzzles that usually featured improbable (and often impossible) board positions for a real chess game.  They'd be published in magazines and newspapers with the jumble and crossword. 

Modern chess puzzles (i.e., those found on chess websites) are used for training players in various useful tactics, and the puzzles themselves are often taken from real games.