Please bring back difficulty choice in puzzles

Noblunder , I agree.
I also think that most of us are not professionals and it's useful to choose the difficulty level of the puzzles , or even keep aside the ones that we find very difficult , in order to solve them later.
THE OPENINGS TRAINER HAS BEEN PERMANENTLY REMOVED??

FatesWarning, it seems so. I think they're trying to destroy what they have created. Maybe Lichess has a self-destructive personality :-)

As usual some comments on this topic are as immature as most of their writers are. Thinking before talking becomes more and more rare.

I'm still a newbie on lichess.org, and I really enjoyed the old trainings-module in hard mode. I pretty soon became aware of the existence of some really really bad puzzles also, but claiming them all to be broken is simply wrong. Yes, there definetely are broken ones, but there are some beautiful diamonds also.

For example, it makes a big difference in a chessgame over the board also, if f.i. your calcualted variation with a whole rook ahead only evaluates in +2 or in +5. So I really enjoy the correct puzzles which have a 2nd or even a 3rd finesse in their main line.

But nevertheless I think the new update of the training-module is simply terrible.

Getting dozens of puzzles with a 200-300 lower rating than your own isn't fun at all.

I strongly support the wish to bring back the choice for different difficulty-levels, and maybe even more than only 3.

@ dvdm (comment #19)
Full agree on the randomness of difficulty, but total disagree in the absence of certain difficulty-levels.

There is an algorithm which presents you new puzzles, and it seems to be randomness adjusted to your own current "rating".

I had several long seesions with the puzzle-module that went roller-coatser-like with rating wins and losses of >200 up and down and up and ... But I always felt that the average rating of the puzzles presented to you in every moment depends on your current rating. Inbetween you also constantly get some puzzles with >2600 to make you unhappy, but in the average you get solvable ones.

I was referring to the hard-level of the previous module here.

So randomness - yes it's very much appreciated, but please within certain intervalls.

@wowei (comment #24)

I never experienced that, on average, the rating of the presented puzzles depended on my current level. On the contrary.
For me, randomness really should come without any form of participation. Indeed, having any information about the rating of a puzzle acts as a spoiler. At least, I know that it does for me.
So, sorry, but I am happy with this. I know it feels somewhat less comfortable, but from a pedagogical POV, I think it is more sound.

@developers:
HINT: perhaps you can present certain intervals, AND an additional completely random mode (mixing all the intervals), where you can get puzzles of *any* rating?

I don't think there have to be buttons for difficulty level. I think it will be enough if we only get puzzles within 100 points of our rating. This ensures that puzzles are doable, but not too difficult. If they are too difficult, our rating will drop, and if they're too easy, our rating will rise. I think the main problem with the current system is that the range of ratings for puzzles that is allowed is simply too big.

I also agree with what most of you say. My tactics rating decreased from 2050 to 1750 just in a day. When I win, I increase 5 points but when I lose, I decrease 25 points.

Also, I noticed that many of the new puzzles are kinda stupid. I found some puzzle that actually were just "capture the hanging piece". And this puzzle was actually above 1900 rating cause no one thinks a puzzle would be so simple (plus, it had a negative evaluation obviously).

I believe that the purpose of the puzzles was to develop your complex thinking not just finding the obvious move. I mean, in a real game, you're more probable to do the obvious move rather than the complex one, but when you play a puzzle you want to practice your thinking not just find the obvious move.

Personally, I really prefered the previous puzzles than the new, but if it's not going to change back, I think it would be a nice idea, when a puzzle gets an evaluation of -10 that it should be permanently removed.

@vasilakoss:
"when a puzzle gets an evaluation of -10 that it should be permanently removed"?
No way!
I just got puzzle 61142 (nl.lichess.org/training/61142), which is entirely correct and valid, with a killer, yet still defensive move 26: Bd5. This puzzle is at -9, which is a real and utter shame.
It's not because many don't understand a puzzle, that it should be removed. Puzzles should only be removed when they are demonstrably wrong.

@DVdm Sometimes the negative evaluation means it is too boring. After the update, many players play puzzles far below their rating and if they lose, their rating drops like hell. And thus, they incline to evaluate a puzzle negatively!

Anyways, I believe that it is clear that something needs to be changed or improved. I really loved the old tactics system, but right now, I think that everyone should agree that it is just annoying to play and gain +5 after solving a puzzle and lose 20 points after failing.

Also, I disagree with playing the same puzzles again after failing. I really remember the position and the correct answer most of the times without calculating at all and I think that many other players can correlate to this.

@vasilakoss:

Yes... overlooking trivial little moves accomplishing modest gains and goals, mine dropped like hell too. Rightly so.
And I just lost 17 points failing nl.lichess.org/training/61144 .
Suits me!
After two days I almost managed to get back to my (more or less) stable level.
I certainly do *not* agree that it is just annoying to lose 20 after failing. Indeed it is annoying, but first of all, it is extremely instructive. I just LOVE this new system :-)