A typical way to do it is to treat puzzles the same as players and rate them based on whether they "win/lose" and the rating of the "opponent"
ChessTempo has a nice explanation here copied below:
The rating system is inspired by an idea implemented at the Chess
Tactics Server. CTS treats both problem solvers and the problems as
opponents with their ...
I see a couple of reasons not to do this:
It's a lot harder to distinguish the pieces. For example, bishops and pawns look really similar, and the black queen and king look similar too.
When you watch a game as an on-site spectator, you don't view it top-down either. Even better: the players themselves don't view the board top-down, but from an angle.
I have found that reading books makes one concentrate more, and the material is usually covered more in-depth. I think that the "in-depth" part of this is what is important. The explanations are usually much better, and geared toward learning something more permanently.
I find that my work on a famous chess site that you buy materials has been much more ...
Partly it depends upon your learning style, but also I'd note that part of the problem with the tactics site you mentioned isn't the computer. It's you.
Seriously, there's nothing stopping you from sitting and thinking about the position on the screen the same as with the position on a board. Nothing except you, that is. And in an age where more and more ...
I also learned primarily from books. I think much more deeply when setting up a position and working through a book rather than online.
I feel that books are best for more positional or strategic learning where taking my time has the most benefit.
I use books when there is a specific aspect that I want to learn such as pawn structures or rook ...
They are currently exactly the same.
Typically, when a website does the old.sitename.com, it is to allow people to temporarily use the old format of a recently-updated website. Over time, they phase out the old one in most cases. The underlying data, such as a database, does not change at all during this transition, just the aesthetics and layout of the ...
I would suggest going to lichess.org and creating one or more studies for this. You can choose to make these public or private or only visible to those you give the link to. Within a study, you can upload the PGN of your games as separate chapters. You will need an account to make studies, but creating an account and using any of the study features is ...
There are four major ways people learn-reading books, doing it for practice, hearing it explained, or watching demonstrations. Not everybody learns best with the same approach. The answer is that it depends. People can choose what method works best for them.
You can play correspondence chess (and I believe set up tournaments) on chess.com. While the site is free, paid members do get more features. I'm not sure if any of these features would be relevant to a correspondence tournament though.
You may want to use the echecsemail website. You can create round-robin tournaments for up to 9 players. For bigger player-pools, you'll have to split them in groups (or maybe talk to the admins).
They also offer the possibility of choosing an alternative starting position (for opening practice purposes mainly)
I hope those kids speak French, though!
When you play in a tournament (especially a FIDE rated one) and submit a carbon copy of your notation, that's how the game can end up in some database (such as chess-db). Chess players wouldn't be allowed to upload whatever they want to well known database sites since then they could deliberately mislead people who look them up to prepare for them.
You can ...
If all you want to do is share your games with others via the internet then the easiest way is to create your own database of your games and upload the file to your cloud storage area, be it Dropbox, Google Drive or Microsoft One Drive. Then you can share read-only links to the file. This is the only free method of doing this that I know.
If you are ...
The project https://github.com/noobpwnftw/chessdb provides an API for getting engine evaluations including also the PV, with the FEN of a position as input.
E.g., try an example from the readme:
The response I got is:
It is pointless to have a rest API for random position evals which have to be precomputed for near-instant response. In that case you might as well ask for an opening book. There are a few sites that with opening book querying tools, which are pretty close.