how come I can beat the intermediate bots but I can’t get past 400

Wow I beat Nelson with less than 1%

In case you were wondering, The probability of beating the maximum bot rated 3200 as a 100 is  

approximately 17 billionth of a percent.

And the probability of beating stockfish 15, the 3700 rated bot as a 100 is approximately 100 billionth of a percent. There though is laying the final boss from chess 960 Fischer random, stockfish 15.1 rated 4023 in Fischer random, and as a 100 the probability of beating it in chess 960 is approximately 1.557758 trillionth of a percent. A trillion is 1 followed by 12 zer0s so 1trillionth is ridiculously small.

The bot ratings here seem wildly inflated, imho.

I agree

Perhaps they should be halved

Not sure if that is accurate.  If you play against a player for a while, you'll start to notice patterns.

Maybe because some bots play unusual move or strange move leading to higher chances of loosing even if it has better position , and sometimes we can find the correct move

Except Mitten, I feel like If I was given a chance to play with Mitten I won't survive 😆

Mittens had a rating that was underestimated

They need the bots elo to be quartered. The elos are so high that for the strongest bots in the world, it is becoming tough to determine what the rating is so people give them random ratings.

well i mean yes, but if they learn how to adapt to your style, they will play something different. just saying, not trying to show off.

I'm just wondering, I have an elo of about 500 elo on blitz on chess.com but when I go ahead and play the intermediate bots 1000-1400 elo I can actually beat them. What would my actuall rating be. I think it might be around 1200-1300

if youre consistently playing humans and are around 500 elo your elo is 500

The bot ratings are absolute nonsense. I'm realistically a 600-player; the highest I've ever reached is 900 and that was in my unreliable first few games, and currently I'm recovering from a massive tilt down into the 200's, so I'm not a good player at all. But I can win against the Nelson bot if I put my mind to it, and Nelson is supposed to be 1200. That's way, way off.

It's best to treat the bots as fun, and as a learning-aid, and regard their ratings only as a relative measure of which bot is supposed to be harder than which other bot. Don't confuse bot and human ratings.

Are you playing with the same blitz time controls with the bots as you play online?

It would be interesting to play the bots against a computer that adapts and evaluates the elo of the bot after multiple games.

Here's an example, the Dante bot versus me

Chess: CoachDanteBot vs lmh50 - 132210137 - Chess.com

I played this honestly, no take-backs, it's not a cherry-picked once-in-a-million win, but the one game I've played against Dante since stating that I can win against him, and I wasn't watching the time but it was the same sort of thinking time as I'd give myself for a 10 min game. The review function rather flatteringly rated my play at 1150, and Dante, who is supposed to be 1200, at 650.

in my chess league im a 1400 but here im like a 500 so i relate.