What is this monstrous level

Ok let's go in for another rant. Feel free to click this off whenever. What the heck is wrong with the 1500 elo range? I'm talking specifically in the rapid format, although I'm fairly certain similar phenomenon happen in blitz and maybe even bullet too. My path from 1000 to 1500 was actually relatively smooth, and while there were some pretty frustrating moments and tilts, overall it seems like a normal climb up the lower intermediate rating ladder. By playing games, and maybe watching some Gotham videos and doing chess.com and lichess puzzles, I was able to climb from 1000 to 1500 fairly quickly. However, once I reached the mid 1500s all hell broke loose. Seriously wtf is wrong with 1500 elo chess players? There are people outplaying you with 91.5% accuracy in a 35 move game even though you didn't even blunder:

Or there are people who, while not playing perfectly like their surname is fish, gets into crazy tactical positions where they calculate several moves ahead and always prevail. There's just too many of the latter case so I won't show them here, feel free to go to my profile and see some lower accuracy games and you'll probably find one. 

Formerly I believed 1500 was the "higher lower intermediate" or just intermediate, but honestly some opponents play well above their level in accuracy and tactical brilliancy, so much more so than anything I've seen before. The difference is so great that even if I'm slightly stronger than I am now, I'm probably still not beating those monstrosities. My theory is that either there's a perpetual, self-reinforcing loop of underrating occurring at this level, or somehow cheaters max out at the lower intermediate range. I have some doubts about the latter though, since 1] Cheaters usually cheat either for clout or ego maxxing, but being 1500 chess.com rapid doesn't exactly achieve that, and 2] sometimes they don't play high accuracy whole game, but have insane tactical foresight or endgame skills that no ordinary 1500 would have. 

So my question is, what's wrong with 1500 chess.com rapid? Why are they exceptionally strong compared to 1400s, for example? Usually a 100 elo difference is significant but not invincible, and it is not exactly a major upset to see someone rated 100 lower beating their opponent. However it is almost impossible for 1400s to win against these monstrous 1500s. I'm also curious if there are other roadblocks along the elo ladder, and specifically at what rating? for those rated higher than me and gone through this experience, share it in the comments below. I would also like to know how you got past this monstrous 1500 "gate of hell" level? Finally, anyone willing to help me out, in particular improving to 1600, I would be very grateful. Anyway for those of you who read this far, thanks for reading, have a good day, peace. 

La verdad es que no eres el único esa crisis de jugador intermedio y es curioso que también aplica en otras actividades competitivas, no solo ajedrez. Es como si de repente todos jugaran con precisión de "maestro" (Y para los desconfiados, piensan que hace trampa), pero en realidad es una mezcla: a ese nivel ya hay menos errores grandes, la gente estudia más teoría, más táctica, y, además, los emparejamientos son más irregulares (a veces te toca alguien que estuvo 1700 y está volviendo después de una mala racha). También influye que la varianza se nota más: un rival puede tener un día inspirado y parecer un monstruo que juega como un 1900, cosa que también se ve en elos inferiores cuando los jugadores estan motivados.

Lo importante es no frustrarse; enfócate en entender tus errores y mejorar poco a poco. Pasar de 1500 para 1600 suele ser más cuestión de consistencia y control emocional que de teoria pura o tener exp de calle en el ajedrez.

looking at this game in particular it looks like move 8 is the biggest issue, which analysis also points out, just taking the c pawn since bishop back doesn't serve a purpose for you, also looking at this, move 12, analysis says trading Queens is best for you but also playing Qe7 instead is called excellent, since you are not trading anymore since you are down and the bishop stays defended. I also thought you played sicilian more often as black, although maybe that's for when they play e4. The first 12 moves look a LOT like the French Defense, which I play always as black no matter what, just Advance,Rubinstein, and Exchange, and sometimes transitions to Alapin Sicilian and I play nothing else as black. If you only know one opening but you know all the variations of it somewhat it gets easier to know how the typically middlegames may develop.

I myself also broke 2000 in Janurary, and I have been back below it today, and will probably go back below it again. Seeing that its now October though, going above 2000 seems more realistic and doable then it did in Janurary. So hopefully eventually getting over 1500 seems easier. Also you mentioned that people don't even blunder but that's kind of the point. I put your game on the game review and I only saw mistakes and inaccuracies, which is the point, granted it is kind of unusual but its not surprising that 100 points between players rated 800 and 900 isn't exactly the same between 2100 and 2200. It gets harder to go up the higher you go since we don't start as Magnus carlsen.

also looking at the other games it shows how tactics are important and you say are doing them which means you will probably be less likely to miss tactics in the future. idk, none of that probably helped but hope you play better

Sí, hubieron varias veces que jugué contra usuarios de 1830 elo aproximadamente

La cosa es que de los 7 que me enfrente más o menos vencí a 3

Heisuke i think the difference between one 1500 and one 1600 is not the tactics, i keep my tactics in the same level from 1500 until 1700 when i improve, the difference is the strategy, in my system by nimzowistsh, the chapters about chains pawn, the pawn alone in Queen's gambit, the two pawn in the same file, are the difference, in not win for tactics, is win with restriction, block and destroy the oponents without give a chance for try to make something.

See here how i don't begun a attack in the opening, i made a attack using a pawn can promote, the oponents need block that pawn and the pieces of him are passive, the mine are active, that's all difference, know piece active and passive, and know how win with piecies active incluse with the same material.

See this game, is only tactics, 1500 is the elo when have the tactics is in the peak, for win against tactical is need know of game of position, the positional game, in my system after the chapter chains of pawns is the introduction to positional game, can search other book too, but is need game of position for improve in that elo, the 1500 or close only know about tactics, the 1600 have game of position and for that win

Oh, a great tip for beginners

Also, each range of 100th elo matters, for example. When I was like for the 2023 I was stuck in 1391 elo for the players of 1400 elo or more, the thing is that some ranges there are certain amount of players that use similar openings, strategies, styles of game, etc. (The 1400 elo even if they don't have a notorious tactic knowledge, they are aggressive at the middlegame)

Yes, Be7 just didn't look good...!