Is Chess.com Rating Meaningless?

I have played thousands of games on Chess.com, and find myself beating players rated over 1700 one day then losing to players rated under 1200 the next. In fact, I find players rated in the 1300's to typically play better than those rated between 1500 and 1600. What causes these discrepancies?

Bro honestly I have had the same thing a 1100 played is a lot better then a say 1350 player

Ima 1500 rated player and play better than 1300s. Wanna play me? 

The rating is a statistical measure of a player's quality. Like all useful statistics it's accurate over a large sample, but doesn't, and isn't meant to, predict what happens in every single game. For example, over 100 games between 1300 and 1400, the 1400 player would be predicted to win about 64. That means that there's a one in three chance (roughly) that 1300 would win any one game. Even at a difference of 200 points the lower rated player is expected to win one in four.

I'd be interested to know what basis you have to claim 1300's play better than 1500's on this site. Unless you've done computer analysis on a large number of games by players in both categories then I don't see any possible way you could know something like this.

After looking at the low-rated profiles of I've been losing against, I've noticed their tactics ratings are usually below 1000! This leads me to believe these players are using an engine for most their moves

As ridiculous as it seems, I may have been targeted by trolls. My rating dropped a couple hundred points in two days, and now I'm suddenly beating lower rated players as usual.

Rating value probably varies depending on the time of day and day of week (I think things may step up a bit on weekends). I also suspect players using the app may not play those using a browser, because it seems I do better using a browser (but it might just be my own visibility issue).

I don't think the ratings are meaningless.  Generally I've found players with higher ratings are better than players with lower ratings.  Check your chess.com stats.  They show your average opponent rating for both your wins and losses.  I'll bet most players' stats show a lower average opponent rating for wins than losses.

And why in the world would these "trolls" target you?

Maybe he had a minor Brain Aneurysm, did not notice, and recovered the next day.

https://www.webmd.com/brain/tc/brain-aneurysm-topic-overview#1

I don't know what it was, but something was wrong. I've been gone a while and have finally returned. The lowest rated players I'm seeing now are in the 1400's, and I'm seeing better play coming from higher rated players.

Congratulations!

I find myself looking at your best win stats and noticing you've never beaten anyone as high as 1700.

But in your defense, your username is herpa-derp so...

 

This isn't my only account, Preggo.

Then you should be banned.

Why would I be banned? Is there something unethical about having more than one account?

 

Members may only have ONE Chess.com account. Members who create more than one account may have all accounts closed.

I guess that's so a person won't have multiple accounts open at one time on different devices/browsers  to analyze games as they are being played. I guess Chess.com is not capable of comparing every game being analyzed with every game being played. I was not aware there was a rule against having more than one account, but it makes sense.

It's stupid though. You don't have to use Chess.com to computer-analyze a game as you are playing it.