How good is 2000 elo in blitz? (serious question)

Hello, I've been playing chess on and off casually for a couple of years and I'm in the 1950-2000 elo range in blitz. According to stats I'm in the top 1-0.5% range. But it doesn't feel right since I've never studied anything or analyzed any game. 

are the stats skewed due to the massive influx of new players?

Average club player I'd say. I'm in the same boat (2100 blitz) and our percentile here is definitely inflated due to the casual players. If you go to any random club or tournament, we wont be in the top 0.5%, we'll be in the top 25% most likely.

I 2003 rating in chess.com

I'm 400 at blitz...

Seems like every time I read a post on here in regard to eilo people just brush off what most would consider a very impressive eilo of 2,000 as though its (common). I wont be surprised soon if someone says I have a 3,000 rapid rating and someone says of thats really nothing cause there are like 1,000 players in our world of over 8 billion people, so no biggy get good scrub or some such....

A moderately good player, but not yet ready for winning tournaments.

Magnus Carlsen:
3276 chess.com blitz
https://www.chess.com/member/magnuscarlsen

2886 FIDE blitz
https://ratings.fide.com/profile/1503014

Hence 2000 chess.com blitz = 2000 + 2886 - 3276 = 2000 - 390 = 1610 FIDE blitz

This could be right but a larger sample size would be useful.

@14

You can generate any number of additional data points.
Fabiano Caruana: 3056 chess.com blitz, 2770 FIDE blitz
Hikaru Nakamura: 3300 chess.com blitz, 2874 FIDE blitz
Anish Giri: 3087 chess.com blitz, 2715 FIDE blitz

I watched Liam vs Danny yesterday, both were 3000+ and danny adopted the guy, as if playing against a rookie.

rating means nothing on chess.com, one can increase his rating by mass playing an opponent. usually by winning majority of those games, other one just tilts afterward.

to op: it means nothing in here, get a fide rating and play otb to figure it out

Like me

Good enough to be an average tournament player

It's not right at all. I explained how that's not how they do it here:

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/chess-dot-com-vs-fide-ratings?page=2#comment-100444533

And here's the link to a survey with thousands of people in it:

https://chessgoals.com/rating-comparison/#chesscomotb

According to it around 2100 blitz here should be around good enough for 2000 otb. There's a slight possibility that it's easier to get ratings here now than when that survey took place, but it wasn't that long ago and there hasn't been noticeable increase for people with stable blitz ratings.

There's something really amiss about that guy, I don't know if he's really old or maybe there's a chance he's really young but he just repeats the same false information and bad advice/ideas over and over no matter how many times he's been proven wrong.

So 2000 blitz is very respectable, it's all relative to someone else or some group of people. It reminds me of weightlifting where people always view things in terms of their own numbers, everyone below that are baby weights and everyone who didn't progress as fast were doing everything wrong when it actually depends on a lot of factors, some people are just lucky enough that they have better genes or developed in a better way for whatever the goal is, for chess you have to be visually see things clearly with how your brain is wired or no matter how much you train you won't be at a very high level.