I won 400 elo points in 20 days

yes very exposed why people support him is beyond me

You are obviously cheating in some games, Diamond members can anlyze CAPS for your games and there we see that a 90+ caps can come about with 55% best moves only, putting someone at elo 2200 or so. So 95-100% best moves means obvious cheating has taken place, otherwise you'd be at a level of chess performance much higher than the world champion Carlsen. It pays to be a diamond member. We can see stats from your games that non-diamond members can't. JFYI

If that really is the case then I would advise you to set opponent strength in options to -50  +400 for the games you seek(in fact I advise that to everyone). Gambits are fun against 1000-1500 rated players but players 1700 and up usually will NOT lose a piece before move 10, they'll just gambit some pawn back with ok center control,get castled and leave you with a prospectless position,wondering what went wrong. I've been there myself. Gambits are bad for your chess improvement mkayy. They'll make you plateau, mkaayy

He isn't cheating.

I just analyzed his two draws with Deirdre Skye and he had a CAPS score over 99 both games as did Deirdre Skye. To put that into perspective Magnus Carlsen has a CAPS score of 98.35 and Garry Kaparov of 98.01, so either both of them happened to outplay the greatest chess players of all time back to back games or something fishy is going on. Ill give Deirdre Skye the benefit of the doubt since he's a 2300 rated player, but Alltheusernamestaken is rated 1500, and to consistently outplay Magnus Carlsen, FIscher, and Kaparov speaks for itself

I just analyzed his two draws with Deirdre Skye and he had a CAPS score over 99 both games as did Deirdre Skye. To put that into perspective Magnus Carlsen has a CAPS score of 98.35 and Garry Kaparov of 98.01, so either both of them happened to outplay the greatest chess players of all time back to back games or something fishy is going on. Ill give Deirdre Skye the benefit of the doubt since he's a 2300 rated player, but Alltheusernamestaken is rated 1500, and to consistently outplay Magnus Carlsen, FIscher, and Kaparov speaks for itself

I don't know what CAPS score is but you can't really use it as proof that the guy is cheating while at the sme time giving Deirdre the benefit of the doubt.  You make it sound nearly impossible to get that score, but Deirdre got it as well? Maybe it's not as hard as you think it is.  

With -200, if your rating is to rise, it'll rise much slower than it could be rising. Think about it. This is counter intuitive, but correct nonetheless. You'd think you'd have more wins with -200, right?=sounds intuitively right)? Well what happens is one plays 4   -150 opponents,wins 4 games and then along comes a -200 opponent, you have a bad game and lose, and BANG!! the points you got from the 5 games are all lost at once, thus meaning you wasted your time and gained nothing by those 4 wins and only one loss. Now imagine  -50   +400. You'll MOSTLY be playing against your own rating anyway. MOST + 400 guys  won't have -400 to the left in their settings anyway. So if you lose to a couple of +250's your rating won't sink that much at all. When you win against one of those, it's +25 points or even more for you. And when you play equal rated players it's mostly 50-50 result-wise, he who applies himself more during the game usually wins, when the players are equally matched. Why would one anyway want to be winning against -200's ? I already know I am better than those players, no fun playing them!

In the second game I have less than 70% on fast analysis and it was a drawn endgame, it was drawn at move 26 but we played a bit more so add more 'best moves' becouse everything that doesn't blunder is a best move. Also it was a 3 fold repetition so add 3 more 'best moves' in a 37 move game.

You and your arguments are just sad.