Puzzles should never be about solving impossible reems of computer analysis - they serve no purpose in improving your game as you will never be able to dedicate such a huge chunk of your time to solving such positions in real play, more to the point you will be unlikely to even be aware that the tactics exist - the carlsen caruana game with that mad "winning" zugzswang tactic is being banded around as a great study position whereas in reality it is worthless to any human.
The ONLY good puzzles fit this criteria:
1. 5 moves max
2. Variation should be extremely forcing, with only minor side lines to consider.
3. End position must be a mate or a trivially winning endgame.
Anything else is garbage that serves no purpose to the furtherment of chess, and those who advocate otherwise should go pay a visit to the world solving championships to learn themselves a good lesson in humility!
The ONLY good puzzles fit this criteria:
1. 5 moves max
2. Variation should be extremely forcing, with only minor side lines to consider.
3. End position must be a mate or a trivially winning endgame.
Anything else is garbage that serves no purpose to the furtherment of chess, and those who advocate otherwise should go pay a visit to the world solving championships to learn themselves a good lesson in humility!