Are Bot's ratings accurate?

My chess.com rating keeps circulating around 1400(blitz).... on the other site it is around 1700. Whatever that's not the matter, Among the newly arrived chess bots... I tried a 1600 rated guy and got the victory, first I thought I was lucky, so I tried many times and won. If Robots are accurately rated, that means I should be a 1600+ rated player. If not then what are the excuse for keeping fake rated bots

Here's one of the game...

Congrats for your win.... And am at the same range lol....just can't find a way to go beyond my rating 

gracias! Have you tried bots yet?

I only tried the first bit....then I went for the next...they told me I need to be a premium member to access it....dunno why

Still you can try a lot of them, 

Let me try .... I hope I can replicate what you achieved with the 1600 bot

sure

In some ways the ratings are accurate. They're pretty tactically alert, but they make very strange positional moves and at a certain point when they're losing they go full kamikaze and give all their pieces away. It's very hard to play them in faster time controls because they move instantly.

@GMproposedsolutions plays a lot with bots rated 1700, he is too 1700...from this I can conclude bot's are correctly rated 

I totally agree with this

Partially true

Isn't it sort of fruitless to compare blitz ratings against bots when there's no time limit? Maybe it doesn't make much of a difference when you're no longer a beginner, but I have a very low rating of 600 in blitz and seem to play on equal footing with bots rated 1300 (played it a few times but it's the highest rating I've tried so far). Seems to me like playing with or without time constraints are two very different things that can't really be compared.

Can you get a rated game against a bot any more? Seems Chess.com has changed the method of getting a game against one. 

As to the question as to whether their ratings are accurate, they ARE the first time you play one of them, But because their play in each case is more and more predictable as you get to know them, they can become easy to beat if their rating is more or less your current one,

my rating is only ~850 and I just defeated a 1600 bot. 

So they can't be all that accurate... either that or I am an undiscovered chess prodigy, lol

I have played enough games, so that I can say that a 1600 bot gives a good competition to at least a 1100 rated player. Since you defeated her, your rating definitely will increase here on chess.com.

My wife is just past beginner. She just beat bot Noam, rated 2200. That is seriously messed up. I went through the moves and the bot made one egregiously bad move after another. To give one example, at one point in the game he was +20 and on the next move was facing mate in 2 (which my wife missed, only to eventually win the game anyway).

They are not accurate at all, you may think he's a pushover with that rating but the T-800 defeated a lot of people.

From what I have been reading about everyone's experience here and on other threads , I think its safe to conclude that the Beth Harmon bots are overrated. I mean all bots at lower levels are in general....but the Beth Hamon bot just goes a bit further and is easier compared to the other bots at her level . And I have seen people 500 rating points below hers defeat her. So am quite optimistic and will try to take on the 2000 rated Beth .