Should I Be Better?

Sometimes, I think I should be more than 700 ELO, because I spot some amazing moves and I don't hang pieces too often. I can beat bots around 1300-1500 but sometimes, I lose against another 700 and I think "They should be rated higher too".

Here are some recent matches I played, with one I won against a computer, one I won against a person and one I lost against a person.
https://www.chess.com/game/computer/80060115

https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/84279610857?
https://www.chess.com/analysis/game/live/84278492373?tab=review

bro, everyone knows bots play like 500 points below their rating

from what i see in your games, you and your opponents are closely matched until one player makes a mistake.

yeah

The one against the bot was just the bot playing the wrong king move, you were totally lost and the you won against a real player was you guys both being dumb. The one that you lost you made blunders and your opponent just capitalized on your mistakes

From what I see from your recent games, you play very well. I also thought that I should be more than my elo, but I found mistakes in my playstyle and adapted to it. If you do the same, I'm sure you'll be 1400 elo in no time.

Bots play much below their strength, and Chess.com ratings are pretty accurate. The only way you'd be under-rated is if you hardly played any games.

To me, what happens is I lose a bunch of games and then I win a bunch of games, and I only gain like 8 ELO if I win, so I think the only way I would get to 1000 ELO is if I won against like someone 1400-1500.

Hello! According to what I saw, I have an opinion about it (may be or not be accurate, but it's just my personal opinion). You seem to know some basics (you seem pretty comfortable in the Italian and Four Knights), but you seem to have no weapons against other than the Italian and Four Knight (for example, the Scandinavian in the game you linked). You don't need to know theory for all openings that exist, but, playing e4, I think you should have a plan against the main openings, at least (Scandinavian, Sicilian, Caro-Kann and French). In your games, you seem to not think long enough in the game about pawn structures and endgame prospects, for example. You double your pawns for no reason and that's not accurate and gives you a disadvantage in the long run. I saw you play 10 min - Rapid, which I think is a good time control, but maybe you could even play 15+10 or even 30 min - Rapid, in order to think about more things when you're playing. My opinion is that your rating is accurate and you can double it if you start learning more about openings, think about how you want your pawns for the endgame and not blunder basic tactics, as the skewer in the game you won that you linked. Hope that helps! Good luck!

Max gain for any one game is +16 I believe.

When I was around 1500 rapid, I believed I was underrated because I find myself giving higher rated players around 1800 - 2000 a good fight before eventually blundering some tactics or not being able to convert my advantage.

Try solving puzzles (it will help improve your tactics), learn more about your favourite opening (trick, traps and common mistakes you make in the opening) and also having a good knowledge of some endgames will go a long way.

Plenty of 700's will be 1700's given the time.

Decent players can get stuck in rating hell because there is a wider pool opponents at the lower levels. You just need to play more games & that takes time.

I once drew a 1200 bot after blundering all my pieces, bot ratings aren't accurate.