Training, more tolerance with movements

#20 has a point, but that doesn't change the fact that it's frustrating to outright fail a puzzle because your mate was a little slower. It should always give "good move, but you can do better" on a slower forced mate. That single change in how puzzles behave would reduce the amount of people complaining about the puzzles by at least 80%.

@Fenris1066, if it's the same line but slower than one move or so (e.g. moving another piece to do a check but still leads to checkmate instead of checkmating right away with the puzzler's preferred piece) then you fail the problem. This supposedly reinforces/trains people to find the fastest solution. However, the "good move, you can do better" (for a different but slower line) is actually counterproductive because it could be inducing people to unconsciously resort to guesswork (out of desperation) which leads to further frustration when they fail especially after getting several of these g.m.y.c.d.b. prompts. ( Kind of makes you think that http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheComputerIsACheatingBastard ) >,<

It would be nice (and more comprehensive) if we were allowed to follow through with those g.m. lines and be given separate rewards/penalties. After achieving some minor closure for failing/solving those, we can continue at the branching point to try and focus on figuring what the main line is (or explore and exhaust the other g.m. lines).

This games make me crazy:

http://es.lichess.org/training/23587

Correct solution:
http://es.lichess.org/hWf2yxusUEk8 (checkmate in 3)

The solution I found:
http://es.lichess.org/5BsyubffXOuh (checkmate in 4)

And again, it just say I make it bad instead of: "best movement but you can do it better"

When I see checkmate, I don't care if its in 3 or 6; I just wanna do it and I don't look for another better sequence; I think its so unfair it takes away your points and it says you did it bad, whereas you win the game

It will be so hard to add one modification, to add the option: if checkmate is still unavoidable, it says: best movement but not the best.

#5:

> If you see that you can win a queen for nothing, you just lose interest. No need to seek for a more complicated line to a mate.

I *completely*, *irreversibly* lose interest.

#5:

> If you see that you can win a queen for nothing, you just lose interest. No need to seek for a more complicated line to a mate.

Here is another way to lose my interest:

Puzzle may insist that I have to go risky, complicated way to win a rook and a pawn. At the same time I see clear, robust way to win a bishop, *and* I *already* have +6 in the *initial* puzzle position.

Well Game_spectator; what I'm commenting is more than only looking for simple lines; what I'm asking is than if you don't lose the checkmate posibility, you don't fail the puzle. It happens to me many times than I find another chekmate line (just 1-3 moves more) and it count me bad game. That has no point, because the check-mate doesnt matter if you do it now or if you do it in 2 moves, during you don't lose the checkmate sequence, you should be good.