- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

What does Lichess 2000 puzzle rating signify?

#1

I've been 2000 on Lichess puzzles for a while and I know "It's not a competition" but I have been struggling to get past 2000 in any time format. I think maybe in Classical I may be able to push my rating past 2000 with a lot of grinding but in blitz and bullet chess it's a battle.
What does this 2000 puzzle even mean? Why doesn't my puzzle rating reflect my actual strength that is 1800ish blitz player.

I've been 2000 on Lichess puzzles for a while and I know "It's not a competition" but I have been struggling to get past 2000 in any time format. I think maybe in Classical I may be able to push my rating past 2000 with a lot of grinding but in blitz and bullet chess it's a battle. What does this 2000 puzzle even mean? Why doesn't my puzzle rating reflect my actual strength that is 1800ish blitz player.
#2

The tactic reflects your ability to generally calculate short variations and pattern recognition. Some puzzles do require calculating long variants, but sometimes those long variants go hand in hand with recognizing patterns that you practically don't compute in most sequences of each variant.

There are several reasons why your tactical rating does not reflect your level in blitz or rapid, the most obvious reason is that you have all the time you want to calculate a puzzle, a very significant reason is that not everyone leads their games to positions where highlight your tactical level more or less effectively. Also chess is not just tactics, it has strategy and opening theory/concepts. The fact that you know a lot of tactics does not help much when you play the openings throwing everything to chance, without recognizing the reason for the opening you are playing and the different variations that may arise.
that can arise.
Another reason is that their tactical level can be more effective in long rhythms (classic games for example), some players have a simple style of play that their tactics are effective in short rhythms and others have complicated styles that are more strategic and their tactics are better in long games (Gary Kasparov was the best example of this).

The tactic reflects your ability to generally calculate short variations and pattern recognition. Some puzzles do require calculating long variants, but sometimes those long variants go hand in hand with recognizing patterns that you practically don't compute in most sequences of each variant. There are several reasons why your tactical rating does not reflect your level in blitz or rapid, the most obvious reason is that you have all the time you want to calculate a puzzle, a very significant reason is that not everyone leads their games to positions where highlight your tactical level more or less effectively. Also chess is not just tactics, it has strategy and opening theory/concepts. The fact that you know a lot of tactics does not help much when you play the openings throwing everything to chance, without recognizing the reason for the opening you are playing and the different variations that may arise. that can arise. Another reason is that their tactical level can be more effective in long rhythms (classic games for example), some players have a simple style of play that their tactics are effective in short rhythms and others have complicated styles that are more strategic and their tactics are better in long games (Gary Kasparov was the best example of this).
#3

@Voy-aSer-ElMejor that makes a lot of sense but is puzzle rating similar to elo rating?

@Voy-aSer-ElMejor that makes a lot of sense but is puzzle rating similar to elo rating?
#4

When they add a puzzle to the database, it is seeded with a rating that is based on the rating of the players who played the game. After that, the puzzle's rating goes up if it "wins" against the player, and goes down if the player solves it.

That's really the only connection. I think for most people, their puzzle rating is higher than their play rating(s), though the size of the gap will differ.

One thing to keep in mind is that, as you play more puzzles, you will get better at doing puzzles fairly quickly until you top out. In live play, it takes a longer time for you to improve enough to make a significant difference in your rating.

When they add a puzzle to the database, it is seeded with a rating that is based on the rating of the players who played the game. After that, the puzzle's rating goes up if it "wins" against the player, and goes down if the player solves it. That's really the only connection. I think for most people, their puzzle rating is higher than their play rating(s), though the size of the gap will differ. One thing to keep in mind is that, as you play more puzzles, you will get better at doing puzzles fairly quickly until you top out. In live play, it takes a longer time for you to improve enough to make a significant difference in your rating.
#5

@TrulyCrestfallen
I think there is no correlation between puzzles rating and playing strength. I reached 2170+ in puzzles, but my rapid rating is around 1500, that reflects my current strenght ( my 1800 classical is overrated, I’m sure ). More than 600 points of difference. As you can see, that’s meaningless.
I like Lichess’ puzzles because I find them more “realistic”, even if maybe it’s just an impression. The defect, in my opinion, is that there is no time count, which puts pressure and therefore simulates real game situation better.
So, always in my humble opinion, puzzles must be taken for what they are: just a way to train one of the many skills involved in playing chess, without giving them too much meaning.

@TrulyCrestfallen I think there is no correlation between puzzles rating and playing strength. I reached 2170+ in puzzles, but my rapid rating is around 1500, that reflects my current strenght ( my 1800 classical is overrated, I’m sure ). More than 600 points of difference. As you can see, that’s meaningless. I like Lichess’ puzzles because I find them more “realistic”, even if maybe it’s just an impression. The defect, in my opinion, is that there is no time count, which puts pressure and therefore simulates real game situation better. So, always in my humble opinion, puzzles must be taken for what they are: just a way to train one of the many skills involved in playing chess, without giving them too much meaning.
#6

It doesn't mean much of anything. Nor is it intended to. However, we chessplayers are competitive and so we will seemingly compete at anything (no matter how inconsequential).

It doesn't mean much of anything. Nor is it intended to. However, we chessplayers are competitive and so we will seemingly compete at anything (no matter how inconsequential).
#7

on chess.com my rapid rating is 1200 but my puzzle rating is 2550 lol

on chess.com my rapid rating is 1200 but my puzzle rating is 2550 lol
#9

@TrulyCrestfallen

Your tactical rating is not directly related to your overall game rating, but they do contribute to your overall capabilities to a greater or lesser extent. It all depends on the player, because if you look closely there are various difference gaps between the rating of tactical problems and blitz and rapid games.

What I can tell you is that it would be much more normal for someone highly ranked in puzzles to surprise you with certain combinations or good mates; but that doesn't have to happen very often, since it's not the same to play against the clock and an opponent in front of you, than just sit and think to solve a puzzle of a winning position from the beginning.

@TrulyCrestfallen Your tactical rating is not directly related to your overall game rating, but they do contribute to your overall capabilities to a greater or lesser extent. It all depends on the player, because if you look closely there are various difference gaps between the rating of tactical problems and blitz and rapid games. What I can tell you is that it would be much more normal for someone highly ranked in puzzles to surprise you with certain combinations or good mates; but that doesn't have to happen very often, since it's not the same to play against the clock and an opponent in front of you, than just sit and think to solve a puzzle of a winning position from the beginning.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.