Sorry if I appear stupid for not understanding why this is a solution, for context white has just lost two rooks in exchange for a bishop, and I cannot see a checkmate after black King moves c5. Thank you in advance for helping me understand!
Help with understanding a puzzle solution
Sort:
Dec 21, 2022
0
#3
p.s. Annotations are my own, but of course the engine was my friend here xD
Puzzle logic is not like playing a game. One reason a puzzle solution stops is to save you the agony of having to choose your next move. After ..Kc5 there are 2 moves for you to checkmate "quickly" .Na4+ and .Be3+. One mates in 7 moves and one in 8 moves. The puzzle engine decides that it would be unfair to require you to find the move that checkmates fastest as that would take a lot of calculations. And it wouldn't make all that much difference in a game so you are given the remainder of the win for free! Another reason a puzzle stops is after you have solved the theme of the puzzle and that is all that is required for a puzzle with this rating.
Exactly what arisktotle said. Puzzles aren’t like real games. If you aren’t sure about an answer just analyze it afterwards. It really helps to get a deeper understanding of the position.
This puzzle is incredibly bad. Most of it is simply cut off simply because it has two solutions (a dual) at the second move. I don't understand what is the point of keeping this trash in the puzzle database. Just delete it, no one will miss it.
magipi wrote:
This puzzle is incredibly bad. Most of it is simply cut off simply because it has two solutions (a dual) at the second move. I don't understand what is the point of keeping this trash in the puzzle database. Just delete it, no one will miss it.
Actually, to a somewhat stronger player the puzzle is not all bad. Seeing how vulnerable the black king is on c5, he will evaluate that the joined white forces will finish off the game quickly. As black, he might even resign without detailed analysis His fate is all too obvious. Stopping in the diagram position is therefore not unreasonable.
The problem is the discrepancy between the rating of the puzzle - which is in the beginner range - and the decision to abort the solution - which would only be obvious to a much stronger player. Even a human puzzle selector would need to weigh these contributing factors, but I am fearful that the current selection process is fully automated and left to machines only! That a machine can play at 4000 ELO rating does not tell you it is qualified to judge the match-up of a particular puzzle setting and the rating level of a puzzle solver. The alternative of filtering every puzzle through a human eye is probably too expensive by commercial trade offs.
The practical approach for solvers is "not to ask all the why questions on the choices and behaviour of chess.com's puzzle functions". Essential is that "there is nothing wrong with stopping the solution in the diagram" and "no incorrect move has been generated by either the player or the engine" and "one receives all the available points if the exercise was rated".Just take the win and proceed to the next challenge. And if your curiosity is really off the scale, simply feed the diagram to the Analysis module to get the engine's verdict!
Arisktotle wrote:
magipi wrote:
This puzzle is incredibly bad. Most of it is simply cut off simply because it has two solutions (a dual) at the second move. I don't understand what is the point of keeping this trash in the puzzle database. Just delete it, no one will miss it.
Actually, to a somewhat stronger player the puzzle is not all bad. Seeing how vulnerable the black king is on c5, he will evaluate that the joined white forces will finish off the game quickly. As black, he might even resign without detailed analysis His fate is all too obvious. Stopping in the diagram position is therefore not unreasonable.
The problem is the discrepancy between the rating of the puzzle - which is in the beginner range - and the decision to abort the solution - which would only be obvious to a much stronger player. Even a human puzzle selector would need to weigh these contributing factors, but I am fearful that the current selection process is fully automated and left to machines only! That a machine can play at 4000 ELO rating does not tell you it is qualified to judge the match-up of a particular puzzle setting and the rating level of a puzzle solver. The alternative of filtering every puzzle through a human eye is probably too expensive by commercial trade offs.
The practical approach for solvers is "not to ask all the why questions on the choices and behaviour of chess.com's puzzle functions". Essential is that "there is nothing wrong with stopping the solution in the diagram" and "no incorrect move has been generated by either the player or the engine" and "one receives all the available points if the exercise was rated".Just take the win and proceed to the next challenge. And if your curiosity is really off the scale, simply feed the diagram to the Analysis module to get the engine's verdict!
I want quite a bit more from a puzzle. I want a very doubtful starting position that turns into a definite ending. I want some ideas in the puzzle and something unexpected. A random check and nothing else ain't gonna cut it.
If this puzzle is considered solved after the first move, it should be considered solved before the first move, as nothing has happened.
Imagine sending this to a chess composition competition. After that, the editor will redirect all future mails from the sender's address directly to the spam folder.
Frankly, I'm not sure that the diagram is "after the first move". It might have been a few moves underway. OP says nothing about that. I agree that playing just one move to get here is not worthy of an 1173 rated puzzle!
Your demands for a decent puzzle are very high. Fulfilling them would most certainly imply inspection and intervention by a strong chess expert. Can't see an engine doing these things. I have come to accept that many things around puzzle solving are weak and that's how I arrived at my advice to simply "put up with it" - unless there are definite errors in moves given or moves missed!