Rapid vs. Blitz rating

I'm not sure, but I don't think there's a really big difference between blitz and rapid. I mean, not 1600 to 1200, but I don't know.
One thing that will really limit a player is when they don't have the right pace for blitz. I noticed in a few of your games you were spending almost 1 minute on moves in positions where there were no tactics. I know it's important to take time to find a plan, but that sort of pacing will really hurt you in the long run.
I don't know how to improve that skill other than to play a lot of blitz. Remember you're only trying to find decent moves quickly, never the best move. Only spend a large chunk of time calculating when there are tactics.

I think the best policy (not just in chess) is your practice should be very similar to what you want for your performance. In other words if you want to be good at pacing yourself in 10 minute games, then play 10 minute games often.
As for being fast and accurate, that comes from first being slow and careful... whether your main problem is pacing or an inability to find good (not best) move quickly, I don't know. Also blitz and rapid ratings do have a gap (I just don't know what it is because I don't know anyone who plays both regularly).

imo, its just the time controls. I am generally a slower player (plus i dont have a mouse, so its hard to play no increment games) so rapid gives me a lot more time to think. In blitz, I just find myself playing the first move that comes to mind, since i rarely have time for calculation ...for bullet, I just premove nonsense xD

Blitz has a greater number of regular players?
I think this is the answer.
I also find a huge difference between the skill level of 1300 blitz player vs a 1300 rapid player (I found this post by wondering the same thing and googling it out). Looking at my games, the 1300 rapid players make very simple blunders, wait far too long to castle, etc.

Good players arent really interested in playing longer games online I feel - so blitz pool is stronger.