Why are players in the 1100 bracket so good on this site?

 First of all let me begin saying I'm not really 1100 ELO ... not even 1350 ELO. The two ratings you see in my profile are almost exclusively in 10 minute matches - 1350 is my rating now after the blitz to rapid change but the time control remains the same.

 In reality Im a 1750-1850 player if I play in longer time controls. How do I know this? I've been playing for more than a decade in another website, a correspondence-like chess site, where I play around 50-70 simul games at a time. I usually take a bit longer to think about my moves, usually a couple of minutes per move, per game. Which is something I can't do here in 10 minute matches.

 And I admit Im really bad at shorter time controls such as 10 minute games, as I blunder in almost every game and I fail to see tactics most of the time, and find no time to think about any long term strategy in my games. Around 600 points rating difference is correct, so Im not complaining about my rating here. That's not really the point of my post.

 My main peeve with this site is everyone at the 1100-1300 bracket here are consistently really strong players. I really don't understand how that is possible. Putting aside all the games where I blunder badly, Im usually under pressure in every game I play. They seem to know their openings, how to play middlegame, endgame, their tactical play is on par with mine and even better, etc.

  On the other site, for example, Im playing a guy who is 1650 and he claims he's around 1500-1600 FIDE. I've outplayed him easily in 1 game and Im about to win in the other game.

 And it's common to find people the 1100 bracket here far stronger than him. 

 I've even beaten players in the 1900-2000 bracket over there - many 1200-1300 players here feel stronger than them. 

 How's that even possible? I understand I suck at 10 minute games, but such a difference? I've also watched all pogchamps and I've seen what *REAL* players in the 1100-1300 bracket play like, and they play NOTHING AT ALL like the players I face. Pogchamp players in the 1100 bracket played at the same level as the 1100 matches on the other site. So what's going on here?? Are 1100-1300 players here the equivalent of 1700 FIDE? That does not explain why the pogchamps players in that bracket were so bad.

Ratings are not absolute. They compare you to the players on that site and time control only.

The ratings here are just as real as other ratings. 

You are really a 1359 here in rapid chess and an 1100 in blitz.

And you are undoubtedly a 1750-1800 on that other site for correspondence games.

All three ratings are real.

A few thoughts. With the addition of technology and analyzing your own games being made much easier, it may be possible that most people are just getting better. It also may be possible that due to quarantines, more and more people are spending more time playing chess. An 1100 now may be able to beat an 1100 senseless from years past. Also, with all things, growth makes the lower ratings harder to get past. If you have millions more beginners than years past, climbing the percentile rating is going to get harder. There's more roadblocks, more people who can absolutely exploit your weaknesses (while someone else may better exploit their own), and generally more things to learn. If the other website is what most would assume it is, the ratings are generally higher there for the same players. I'm something like a 1500 on that website, and you can tell I'm nowhere near that here. It could be a lot of things, really. Chess is hard.

considering that 900-1000 is the average of this site, likely down to people creating an account, losing a few and then never coming back, but still that makes 1100s above average players (on this site) but they arent strong by any stretch of the imagination. up to around 14 1500 i believe is generally still considered beginner level chess. 1100 rating knows some but not a huge amount or theory, a few endgames and can spot simple tactics (i have a friend on here thats 900 but can do 2000 level tactics) but they cant tell you much about the position and likely couldnt point out a bad bishop even if there is only one bishop on the board.

if youre struggling against this level, then it might not be that they are good, but youre lacking something in your knowledge and should work on something. perhaps strategical ideas missing maybe? im only hitting 1500, highest is 1528 so im hardly a beacon of knowledge

I played with 1 person so far that was in the 1100 range before the time of the game,   I noticed that they are very aggressive and like to use their knights a lot.   I think that could make it even harder to deal with than the objective strength necessarily is because knights are tricky.   I also noticed they like to go on the sides.

I hope you can see what I mean

The ratings on this site are harder than others. Just use the percentile to judge how good you are. 

The computer after the game said so too,  I saw it but thought my line was stronger.  

They used their Knights a lot because you harassed them with pawns!  Well played.

so I'm not alone I'm by far not a great player like you, at my level here I should not match to people who in analysis play 97% preferred moves as an engine where I score 35% engine alike as a human I don't know all the best moves. So am I playing humans or botz here ?? you see on other places get much better counter play more interesting games and I'm sure those people are humans. it kinda feels often unnatural.

People who really take their time in correspondence will generally have a much lower rating in live chess. 

@ziryab

You can find others if you play some daily here. Many of them have auch higher daily rating.

maybe they are actually really good but they just started. Or maybe they started cheating, idk, these are just guesses, so don't start thinking I'm accusing everyone of cheating.

I would guess part just good players, part sandbaggers. I am near that rating, and can see that there are some players a lot better than others. I also have a very wide range of strength when i play. Sometimes, I have played like a 2000 fide, and beaten players in that range. others, a 700. If you notice, I havnt played in a while because i've gotten bored of chess after 3hrs per day during the summer, so my opinion now might be way off, But when i was playing, probabaly right.

for instance, i usually score about 80-90 percent accuracy (i think), but I still linger in that range of 1000-1300 for blitz elo. my uscf was around 1300 when i played

sorry thought you could see the game like that

Heres a game I had that shows the unbalance of this rating range

no moves are on the game

only starting position