Progress and rating: puzzles ELO v's rapid ELO v's BOT's

Hey All - apologies about the weird title for this thread!

Essentially, I am curious about a few things that maybe some could enlighten me on pls.  Though I have been able to play chess for many years, I haven't played much at all and only in recent years have I joined chess dot com.  I decided earlier this year, rather than just to have a chess dot com account and do nothing with it, that I would make more effort and at least try to play some games to see what ELO I could potentially attain.  I consider myself pretty much a beginner, in my elder years (61) so no real potential for significant improvement, and over the last month or so in my few games I have managed to get to a rapid ELO rating of 717 - still very low for sure, but slowly improving.  Interestingly, my puzzle rating is 1499, and I enjoy attempting to solve puzzles a lot.

Here's my query: when practicing and learning, I play a bot rated at say 700, I win easily with total control of the game, when I play a bot rated 1500, I usually win - though maybe not as easily, however, if I were to play a player rated at 1500, I would be totally annihilated, and I mean totally.  Why is there such a difference in the playing level of bots rated at 1500 compared to people with a similar ELO?  What then is the point of a rated bot if it doesn't accurately represent the equivalent ELO of a player?  Surely, they should be somewhat on par with each other, yes?

Also - is there any correlation in puzzle ELO rating v's playing ELO?  Given I have a puzzle rating of 1499, is it inferred that I could potentially attain a player rapid ELO rating of somewhere around that level... or is that simply pie in the sky?

Just to add, I have no expectations of what ELO I might get to,  I guess I'd like to get to 1000, but not sure if I am capable.  I am curious about the relative ELO's of players v's bot's v's puzzles etc.    Thoughts...?

John 

I couldn't tell you in regards to bot elo. It is very misleading.

Puzzle rating does not related to a players chess rating. It's completely separate. I heard someone say once that you should try for a puzzle rating 1000 points higher than your chess rating. Whether or not this is true, I don't know. I'm around 1200 elo rapid and have a puzzle score of 2500. The only take away is that one year ago the best I could do was 1700. So even if it doesn't match up with the elo of my chess games, I can still measure it and see improvement in my understanding of tactics and positions.

I just want to say, even though you're in your 60s, that doesn't mean you don't have potential. Maybe becoming a titled player is unrealistic, but 1500-2000 elo? That's probably possible with study and dedication.