First I believe playing with very fast time controls has something to do with it. A lot of adrenaline is involved, and you can't be quite rational. While playing standard something similar has happened to me. Losing streaks of 4 or 5 games. That is very bad for my standard. Why does it happen? First of all I am too tired or upset when it happens. I should stop after the first lost game. But then a sort of addiction kicks in. Now I am learning to stop after one or two lost games. Some times I believe that the server is conspiring against me (LOL), finding very strong opponents only. It is certainly true that I have come across very low rated players who play as if they were rated 400 points higher than the "official" rating . That makes me furious, because no matter how you explain it, it is sandbagging.
Friend goes "on tilt" after losing a few games. -150 rating points
OP sez, "I really need to stop playing bullet."
You know what you need to do. 
OP sez, "Once I told my coach that if he ever catches me on chess.com after 10 pm, he could fine me $100. He never does, though."
Maybe he's saving up the charges for one big bill. 
Something like this:
Blitz Addiction
While taking a break from work, I went online to play a couple of blitz games in preparation for tonight's event. I lost the first, badly. The second was worse. After three losses in a row, I knew I was in trouble.
That's how the addiction works: losses mean more play. The game plays second fiddle to the struggle for rating, for pride, for something. Whateverit is, I tried to capture it a few years ago in a paragraph intended to be the start of a piece of short fiction.
His heart dropped after the screen displayed the words “white checkmated”. After all, he was up a rook, had better position, and was rated much higher than his opponent. Nevertheless, his king was hemmed in by his own rooks in such a way that his opponent’s only remaining pieces—a bishop and a queen—were able to deliver checkmate. In his desperation, following this heartbreaking loss, he continued playing game after game, seeking redemption.I never wrote more of this story—too revealing.
In the fourth game, I tried to run my opponent out of time in a dead drawn rook and pawn endgame. I lost on time in a dead lost position instead. I won game five and was challenged to a rematch. Easy rating points I thought, and accepted. The game was tougher, but I won it too. Thankfully, I was able to stop there.
The New Year's Resolution lasted two weeks.
Joseph Henry Blackburne on Addiction and Chess
Edward Winter's exceptional Chess Notes column on 7 January, "Chess and Alcohol," carried an image of an 1895 republication of an interview with Joseph Henry Blackburne. The article was published first in the Daily Chronicle and then in Chess Player's Chronicle; Winter reproduces it.
The reporter asked Blackburne whether chess is "the intellectual pastime that some people declare," whether it has a place in schools, and whether perhaps it might even serve as a substitute for geometry. Although the question seems a bit over the top, Blackburne's answer serves a cautionary footnote to the efforts of many (including me) who push chess into the school curriculum. The reporter might have asked whether it could supplement or precede the study of Euclid (original works in geometry), rather than replace such study. Would Blackburne's answer have differed? We cannot know. But the truth of his remarks ring true in any case, at least they do when we consider the widespread ailment known as an online blitz addiction.
Blackburne said, in part:
Decidedly not. I know a lot of people who hold the view that Chess is an excellent means of training the mind in logic and shrewd calculation, prevision, and caution. But I don't find these qualities reflected in the lives of Chess Players. They are just as fallible, and as foolish if you like, as other folk who don't know a Rook from a Pawn. But even if it were a form of mental discipline—which I take leave to doubt—I should still object to it on the ground of its fatal fascination. Chess is a kind of mental alcohol. It inebriates the man who plays it constantly. He lives in a chess atmosphere, and his dreams are of gambits and end games. I have known many an able man ruined by Chess. The game has charmed him, and as a consequence he has given up everything to the charmer. No; unless a man has supreme self-control it is better that he should not learn to play Chess.It has been years since I've read Alexander Cockburn, Idle Passion: Chess and the Dance of Death (1974), a book written in the wake of the Fischer boom in the United States. As I recall, however, Cockburn's argument against chess seems almost a book length meditation on this brief statement by Blackburne.
Chess is intoxicating, blitz especially so.
http://chessskill.blogspot.com/2009/01/blitz-addiction.html
Happens to me. In the real tournament, I had a draw and then 2 losses. The tournament had 4 rounds G30 d5. The last game my emotion and pride kicked in and all I tried was to win, not to enjoy the game. Even though I won, I still feel the best way to remove emotion and bring rationale into the game is to win earlier rounds. relieves pressure. Since, if you want 2 points and lose first 2 out of 4 games, you are in tremendous pressure and have to win , which is tough. Thats when emotion kicks in. Also bullets and blitz are fine. Do them minimally. If you play real tournaments play longer games. basically use the time control of the tournament. I understand the addiction you feel. You feel more addicted to win after a loses for something named ego. Thats why prepare well, and do your best in the first few games.
I sympathise a lot. I have broadly the same experience from time to time. The solution is of course to take a break, but that it is much easier said than done. Still, there are two things to hold on to:
1) All bad episodes come to an end (usually when you have calmed down and are able to play dispassionately)
2) If the tilting was due to frustration in part caused by learning new things and not quite grasping them at first, then you can generally look forward to a "growth spurt" when things begin to reassemble in your mind. I read "My System" in May and June and managed to fall into the 1650s! (From around 1800) After that, it clicked and I hit a new peak. Same thing happened after reading Gelfer's "Positional Chess Handbook" - a bit of a dip, and then a new peak.
I'm on Rios's "Chess Structures - A Grandmaster Guide" now. A great book, but already shaking up my thoughts with temporarily debilitating effects on my Elo.
Hang in there, keep trying to improve, and don't expect it to happen instantly. Time is the magic ingredient.
Friend wrote this to me:
Isn't there a term in poker called "full tilt," which refers to someone who has lost a lot of money and plays sort of recklessly/emotionally trying to win it all back? Is this the correct context?