The only way you could lose 300 ELO is if your score is being suppressed by the site

Now, every time I bring this up, it's usually after a suspiciously long losing streak where opponents with an ELO of 600 play like they should be at an 800 or 900 level. After making posts like these, suddenly opponents are playing at the ELO advertised next to their username and I go on a long winning streak. In fact, the last time I made a post like this, my ELO jumped from 670s to a peak of 800.

A few other things I've noticed: Playing rapid tournaments seem to produce a more level playing field than just playing a standard 10 minute rapid game.

Whatever system the site uses to match players- at best, it's just a terrible system. At worst, it's rigged to get you to buy products the site offers.

I think the site should prove to everyone that it doesn't suppress scores to get players to buy memberships. They should explain why ELO can fluctuate so wildly and why the match-ups are often uneven.

What would you accept as proof they are not "suppressing scores to get players to buy memberships"?

Streaks are an expected outcome of stochastic data. You'll need more than your suspicion to show that your results are fishy.

A third party AI could analyze all games of both members and non members to see how the statistics differ. It could even analyze the statistics of new members and compare that to before they were members.

My question to you: What would you accept as proof that they are suppressing scores to get players to buy memberships?

Better yet, the site could explicitly state in their terms of service that they do not use bots in their user's game match-ups (game match-ups where the user intends to play another human being) as a suppression tactic and that they do not suppress user scores in any way whatsoever to get them to purchase memberships. I mean, if the site isn't suppressing user scores to get them to buy memberships, then the site should have no problem stating word for word in their terms of service (where it counts) that they do not do this.

The site looks at the seek parameters and paired compatible seeks. There's some attempt to keep poor connections from good ones and a poor Sportsmanship pool, but the site isn't trying to manipulate pairings in other ways. It's the luck of the draw.

How do you know this?

That's right... the entire chess world is in a conspiracy to prevent you from reaching 1200 rating.

Jesus.

Pro tip: if your opponent threatens mate-in-1, don't let him play mate-in-1.

Playing games like this and then coming up with bizarre conspiracy theories is not the way to get better at chess.

If you have played chess for quite some time now, you will know that rating fluctuation is normal. The quality of your game can be affected by a number of reason outside chess.com.

For me, once I start a losing streak, it is always hard for me to get back on track because its like there is something whispering to me that I will make a bad move soon and as such, my game quality reduce.

Tip: when you are on a losing streak, take a break if you don't want to lose 300 rating points. Also try to own up to your losses instead of blindly blaming it on the site.

()[]<>__

Ratings here for slower time controls are correlated reasonably well with FIDE ratings. Unless you mean the you personally, and not people in general, are subject to rating suppression.

Nah. It's called tilt. People lose 300 ELO points or even more as part of normal fluctuations- playing when drunk, tired etc or simply having a random streak of losses against people playing well that day, it's just a statistical inevitability. We know it's not a conspiracy, because people also sometimes gain 300 points just as quickly. Please don't correlate your performance with making posts like this, nobody wants to have to see one every time you're playing poorly.

The burden of proof is always on the one making the claim. That's just basic logic. Elo fluctuation is normal OTB as well, many people fluctuate ~150 points around their actual strength. It is exaggerated online due to the ability to play many games and start tilting. You usually can't play a hundred otb games a week. You certainly can online.

true, just because someone is rated under 1000s, even 400s or 500s, it doesnt mean they cant spot a mate in 1

I never said I was perfect. But it's funny how you cherry pick one game to prove your point. Am I supposed to be without mistake in order to be taken seriously?

Your point was noted. But there is no conspiracy to reduce your rating here.

And for missing mate in one. Even me (2018 rapid rating) I still miss mate in one sometimes. No need to feel bad about it.

It looks like we're playing bots, not human opponents.  Things have changed on this site, dramatically.