Is 2400 a good puzzle rating?

My current rating is 2410 in puzzles. It sounds like a nice high number, but at  the same time the puzzles don't seem that difficult and most errors seem like blunders. What should my puzzle rating be to be considered a strong player at the club level? Should I keep doing more puzzles or start focusing on other aspects of the game? 

In my opinion to be considered a strong player doesn't depend on puzzle rating. For example a player can have 3000 puzzle rating and still have an elo of about 1000. Puzzles just help you learn different tactics and maybe see them faster but it's more important to actually play the game and learn from your mistakes.

But to answer the question, yes it is good.

If you want to solve puzzles do it at lichess dot org, actually people at chess dot com get to the point that they get bored doing touch moves and don't really try, actually there are 3800 problems easier than you can imagine.
I think about 5 months ago the 3000 elo problems were hard enough, but for some reason there are problems that I don't know because they are rated 3000 or more elo.

I think the problem is that people are no longer so motivated and they "make mistakes" in easy problems, this raises the classification of the puzzle even though it is objectively very easy. If you want to solve puzzles do it in lichess or in chess tempo. Tactics are just an add-on anyway, and objectively if necessary, but the tactical rating on chess dot com is a bad joke. It is also a better option to have a book with a good collection of tactical problems, in reality the instructive and learning by tactical topics is more important than your tactical ranting at chess dot com which is a joke to raise self-est

There are essentially two ways of doing puzzles, with different learning objectives:

1) To train tactical pattern recognition. You do this by solving easier puzzles quickly. 

2) To train calculation and visualization. For this, you go for harder puzzles and take your time, trying to fully understand the position and calculate all the relevant variations.

On Lichess you can do as many puzzles as you like and take as much time as you like, but you also have the option of doing "puzzle storm" (their version of puzzle rush). You can also do puzzles on ChessTempo, they have different sets.

Puzzles are highly inflated here.  Try other sites see what your rating is there.  Chesstempo

There's no such thing as 'inflated', just different rating systems. If the puzzles challenge you and are well selected, then it doesn't matter how the ratings are scaled. That being said, I agree that ChessTempo is a good resource.

A puzzle rating of 2410 is impressive and indicates that you have a solid understanding of strategic patterns and combinations.

Independently the puzzles of chess dot com do not have an inflated rating, but comparing the puzzles of other platforms the rating in tactics is inflated here. Also comparing with the blitz rating correlation of the same platform the tactical rating is inflated.

idk

Comparing the rating ratings on different platforms is like comparing different currencies. Whether you have 100 British pounds or 121 US Dollars, you are not richer one way or the other (at the time of writing), so it doesn't make a difference. Same with tactics: if you play tactics regularly on two sites, and one gives your rating as 171 and the other as 32821, then it just means that 171 on site A is roughly equivalent to 32821 on site B, nothing else. It says absolutely nothing about the quality of the puzzles. And the ratings from games are a different thing altogether.

When it comes to comparing puzzles between sites, what matters is the quality (are they selected from real games, do they cover a wide range of tactical themes for you to learn from, etc).

It means good tactical pattern recognition and decent calculation skills, it says nothing about strategic skill (making long term plans based on the characteristics of a position).

Directly comparing one place's rating to another based on how much you can achieve is different than comparing how good you prove to be at a given rating. By your logic, comparing one currency with another, there would be no inflation, but inflation is not calculated like this, but based on the rise in prices of products and services.
If we go to the tactical rating, this would take into account the specific tactical capabilities of the individual who has a given rating.

If you see the 3800 puzzles from chess dot com you will realize that not really as you think. Chess dot com has a serious problem with the rating of their puzzles that from what I see they are not in a hurry to correct this based on the lie that exaggerated elo ratings are not a bad thing when it really is a terrible thing. There are a lot of highly rated puzzles that are too easy to ignore that something is wrong here.

In correlation to the strategy in particular, the tactics do not really reflect the strategic level, but the tactical level does influence the strategic level and other aspects of the game. It is not true that a player with a tactical level of 600 can reach 2000 elo in blitz or rapid, so it is undeniable that tactics have a correlation in how a player performs in their games, but it is also true that there is no an exact formula to calculate what that correlation is.

In addition, there are complex strategies that depend directly on tactical understanding and this is reflected very clearly in classic games and in a less marked way in rapid games, strategy is a means to reach an end or even an end to reach a means, in Both ways apply the tactic with the strategy; The other strategic aspects have to do with things like pawn structure, strong squares, and endgames; in all these cases the tactic remains present, so there is no strategy that is not influenced by the tactic at some point.

Anyway I don't think that 2400 is a high elo in tactics when it comes to chess dot com, not even 3300 represents a strong level in tactics in chess dot com and if we go further my doubts remain, when I see problems of 3800 than anyone you can solve without thinking with a sequence of intuitive moves.

I'll be boring repeating the same thing, but in my opinion puzzles rating means nothing really concrete. If it were, real game skills would be positively affected.

No.

Yes it's really really good compared to most people on this planet. Keep up the good work.

Yes its a fair rating, it means u have a good eye for spotting combinations and tactics

good