Ratings and stuff

So I went back and calculated what my rating would be if the tournaments I played in this year were my first forays into rated chess. The calculator spit out that I would have a rating of approximately 1580 (based on 15 games). This is pretty far from the rating I started at this year, but not terribly far from what my rating is right now. I think it's probably a pretty decent approximation of my actual playing strength, but who really knows? These are really just labels we attach to things.

Sometimes people dislike the rating system because ratings don't "accurately" portray the play of somebody who is returning to chess from a long break (they've either grown weaker in absence or stronger in absence), but I think my rating is catching up very quickly to my playing strength even after only 4 tournaments, especially given that 2 of the 4 tournaments I've been at I played at a mediocre level (losing two rating points at one, even). I played around with the rating tool and found that, if somebody rated 1200 plays at about a 1600 level for 16 games, their rating will be over 1500. The exact parameters depend on the number of games in each tournament, exact ratings of opponents, and exact performances in the tournaments, but that seems like a very reasonable amount of activity to get to one's "real" rating after a spell of inactivity.