Chess at low elo

Hello Chess.com!

I wonder about my opponents in the low rating area (1000-1300) on this internet site. For me it feels like playing against an engine because when I compare opponents from this chess pages with other chess pages I would totally say that either players on this site are better or they blunder less. Some blunders are in my opinion typical for the low rating players which I couldn't find here (Heavy blunders like the queen). Besides I would say games here feel similar to games played against a fritz engine on low difficulty.
So my question would be, do you use engines in low rating in order to have less waiting time or something like this or is it just me?

Call it rating, I'm still very curious, maybe somebody from Chess.com can answer this questing

No, we don't use any engines at low rating to speed up how fast you get pairings. Everyone you play is a real human  

Well...if you have your rating (whatever it is) after a few dozen games, then you are equal to your opponents.  Maybe you have less strategic and tactical knowledge, but you rarely make gross blunders.  Or maybe you have more knowledge but you do make those blunders and give games away.  Or maybe you lose on time.  Or maybe you steal games on time (not really stealing though).  Regardless, you have the same level they do, in some sense.

But my own feeling, which you may be experiencing, is that people who are supposedly "low" rated are still pretty smart and trying hard and will find good moves a lot of the time.  What sets them apart from better players is that a few times per game they do something really bad.

Also, if you start improving, you might think "wow, I'm way better now, because I have much better understanding and I see much more," and yet you only gain 100 points or so...because believe it or not your opponents even only 100 points higher see a lot more too.  This is what I've really noticed, going from around 1200 to 1350+...so often I'll make a move with purpose and my opponent will counter it...they wouldn't have done that before!  And then I'll notice they have some purpose of their own and I have to counter it...that wouldn't have happened at the lower rating either.  So I assume it just keeps on that way up the line.

Thank you for your extensive answer. I just figured out that my rating on this site might be lower compared to other sites but corresponds more or less to the same performance. It was probably just confusing me loosing against "low" rated players that I'm used to win against.
I'll keep up the work and I hope to have the same feeling you described soon!

Much of what's been said above I agree with ,it chimes with my own experience being in the same (and presumably most populated) ratings zone. Though I have to accept what I've read about a 1200 rating qualifying a player as about average (hence the name)or,in fact,only an 'advanced beginner'-'intermediate' starting at 1400-this description really irks-many in the 1100-1300 range(most whom I've played)I would say know what they're doing+don't blunder generally and see things,either one more so than the other,so you can see why they're rated at the level. There are a few who seem significantly 'out' from where they should be,which you can often soon tell in play.And some are not 'playing the game',if not downright cheating,IMO-when the (supposedly)same opponent improves noticeably from the immediately preceding games or sometimes even within the same game,it makes you wonder-engine?-another player using the same account,or giving them advice?-I have had this admitted to me, actually,when questioning it in game chat.

hi!