1600-1700 rated players, how good are you?

I am rated around 1600 (lower recently as I can't buy a win) and my USCF is around 1400 - i find that playing 1600s here is far more difficult than the 1300s in USCF, even checking games after, my opponents rarely make mistakes unless i really force them where as in USCF, 1300s will give me stuff much easier  - i was curious what others who play tournamnets and also standard chess.com games think

anyone in this range that can comment?

i've seen the regression analysis but all those analysis point to me being better than i am, i think you have to take at least 1-200 points off a chess.com rating to get your actual OTB at this rating range

Dont get caught up in an online rating.  To many different things factor into it.  

id say thats true, however, i see there is a pretty consistent quality of player at diff levels - im just curious how that matches up to the more typical ratings

that sounds about right, 200 points seems reasonable

yea, i think a 1300 USCF isnt as strong as a 1600 player here on chess.com - but thats just my limited experiences, could be that i play in a weak area

Yes, many of the 1200-1300 Rapid players on this site are comparable to the 1400-1500 USCF players I have played. Some of them are even tougher than that.

The standard ratings here used to be pretty good at tracking your USCF rating.  At the lower end, your chess.com rating was overrated compared to your USCF and at the higher end the reverse was true.

Then they tried to rebalance the ratings some time ago and I never bothered tracking anymore.

It's a lot easier to do soft cheating online without using an actual engine, which will make your opponents seem harder.

Just realized this question was directed at 1600-1700 players so maybe I shouldn't have answered. 

I'm currently on a 139-game winning streak in live chess (and 141 in all games if you count 2 correspondence games I finished in the middle of the streak). That's how good I am.

1600-1700 rated might know few openings deep and traps, but they don't understand fully the ideas, positions etc. They have holes in their chess understandings. Might know famous rook endgame positions like lucena but lack knowledge in queen and pawn edngame or king and pawns endgame or any endgame they are terrible. Ocassioanlly they spot some tactics here and here but 2 moves later they might forgat that tactic exist and lose the game... Still making random blunders and visualization/evaluation errors. But they are pretty good at spotting weak squares pieces and holes against heir opponent. They can play quick. Often they don't do anything or try to figure out opponent plans. They can be easily provoked and play fast moves..

Their chess is not stable - they can get distacted easily or completely change plans during a game and get lost by themselfs.. Still many positions they simply dont understand and can't play. They fail to convert won endgame or hold draw. But if you don't do much damage to them you can lose if just shuffle around.

 People who play those 1 - 5 minute games are like they're playing Snakes and Ladders it's so fast. There's no time to plan or use much strategy. Just a bunch of mistakes by both players. That's the way they like it. They make sure they play others equally ranked so they don't lose many points. and it ends up a 50/50 win/lose ending. A proper game should take at least 10 minutes.   

On chess.com, daily and rapid are almost universally higher than a person's OTB rating, at least for your rating range. People like to say "there's no way to compare" but since it's almost universal, comparison is actually very easy. (Although a direct +100 or -100 is not possible because some people are better or worse than average depending on the time control. "Rapid" is much faster than OTB)

As noted above, chess.com sometimes alters the ratings, so those old comparisons done years ago aren't good anymore.

is 1600 a good rating

This is essentially me. I am trying hard to improve but its a hard slog, what a wonderful breakdown, kudos 

to calculate more accurately your Elo really you must calculate first your elo mistake rating move in 5 games. for example if the blunder move it is of 1200 rating you are about 1800 elo rating or if your mistake rating elo is about 1600 elo you are about 2200 and so on.

Hello!

Well, my OTB rating(FIDE) and blitz and rapid rating are very close! like 20 points different or so. Even my daily is in the same 100 range!

I'm an expert ( I have been over 2000 for a while), 1700 rated players can be very good. OTB rating is not always lower than online. I've heard about a 2200 OTB blitz player whose online blitz is around 1600.

on chess.com many people i cant tell between human and robot but otb they don't really make blunders more like tactical mistakes and maybe some opening mistakes due to lack of knowledge

Class B otb players are decently strong. They won’t hang obvious tactics, and usually won’t hang longer tactics either, and can find good plans in familiar positions. However, they will spend time in unfamiliar positions to find bad plans or no plan at all. They demonstrate mediocre knowledge of positional and strategic play, and by taking advantage of those mistakes they collapse quickly under pressure. None of those shortcomings make them a bad chess player.