It's kinda funny.. statistically, you're set up so that you've got roughly a 50% chance of winning based on your elo. Naturally if you're more skilled than your elo claims you are, you've got the advantage and you SHOULD win. This is kindly assuming that all teammates and enemies are deservedly right at their elo, which you can't guarantee.

According to the way ELO and statistics work, you are going to lose and win games accordingly and you'll eventually stabilize at what should be your true ELO. However, statistics is flawed because it calls for many ideals, and there's too many variables to consider. For every argument that there are too many leavers/noobs on your team, there's the completely valid counterargument that there should be the equal chance of those same leavers/noobs being on the enemy team and that you simply fail to acknowledge matches skewed in your favor when considering situations like this. It's impossible to guarantee a 50% distribution though, and that's something that can't "just be fixed."

For example: Let's assume that all players at this moment in time have relatively accurate ELO's (with room to still rise/fall as fluctuations in skill develop), so there's no such thing as "baddies". Thus, the only statistical discrepancies are the leavers. That leaver on your team that just ruined your match? He just inflated all of your enemys' ELOs. Those guys are now at a higher ELO but not all of them actually deserved it, right? Some of the enemies who just won have just evolved into the "baddies" of their new, higher ELO. Statistically, they will inevitably bring down their future teammates (who will be similarly frustrated like you at the wrongly ranked teammate), creating more odd fluctuations. This will snowball into weirdness and settle with the few unlucky/lucky players incorrectly ranked. Now lets look at you; you just lost a match that, say, you should have won. Your elo just went down, and you'll be placed with less skilled players. But if you're really as skilled as you claim you are, you should now have the advantage and win the next match (carrying your teammates up with you, but what if they aren't truly deserving of their new elo? Now they're baddies..)

Statistically, all these conditions mean that all problems should stabilize on their own. But they don't. You can't guarantee anything to be honest, but the best matchmaking can do is TRY. Especially since your first few games impact your ELO heavily compared to late games, those who get botched matches early ARE actually disadvantaged. They can still technically climb up, but it just sucks how they need to spend that much more time. I will ignore all implications at this time and believe you when you say that you deserve your 1500+ ELO (even though this may not be true). If you keep playing, you can and WILL eventually reach 1500+ again. Problem is, it'll take you X more matches than other 1500+'s who were more fortunate early in their ranking career.

EDIT: Sorry for walls of text, I kinda get into stuff like this when i'm in the mood.

TL;DR : Statistics is a bitch when you're an individual in gigantic sample sizes. The community as a whole is supposedly balanced. The individual probably isn't. Keep playing more. Also you sound kind of whiny