That's right. To make it even better, I was the top seed in the U1900 tourney and finished on top. While none of the matches were really challenging (since the closest player to my rating was a 1702 and I estimate my rating to be a little higher than 1806 it is on paper), I feel great knowing that I showed that I am a champ rather than a chump. I didn't even look at the ratings of a single player until after I recorded the score for the third game of my 3-0 sweeps. And I am $50 richer ^_^ ...but not really when you consider travel expenses, food, hotel fee, and tournament fees =(
Congrats, PipProdigy! Some people never look at the ratings in a tournament, and are successful. I still like to know the rating of my opponent, - knowing the rating tends to give me an idea of where their technical level is, so I know to look for weaknesses at that level - but I'm quick to disregard it if they show they are better than that. I'm not sure if knowing their rating really helps that much, however.
I can kind of agree that the rating can give you an idea of where they may be in their development, but a player's strokes tend to tell me a lot more about them than their rating. The warm-up and the first 4 points usually tell me everything I need to know about a player's level of skill. The 1500 on my first table was soundly defeated by the 1200. He probably should have paid as much attention to the strokes as he did the rating. I found out later the 1200 rating was 5 years old, but the strokes were much newer xD.
Also, since you are both a more experience player than I am and a better player, I don't think I would be able to classify a player's weaknesses by rating and exploit them that way. I just try to observe as much as I can as quickly as I can to know what to do against each opponent.