There are two effects at play that doom dating on Tinder:
First effect, the "dead sea effect." People who are serious about dating quickly leave the Tinder dating pool. (Because they find someone.) Who is left? People who are not serious about dating. Therefore you are more likely to match with people who are not serious about dating. This could be counteracted if Tinder showed people who are not serious about dating, to each other, and showed new users, to each other, but I don't believe this occurs.
The second effect is a sampling bias: suppose that some people talk to and meet EVERYONE - like, 1,000 people. In this case your matches are more likely to be from such people, than people who meet 3-5 people.
For a proof of 2: suppose that there were no limit to the number of people one talked to - you could talk to and meet any number of people between 0 and 7 billion (number of people on Earth.) In this case if there were a group of 500 people who each had 7 billion people they met with, then they would all meet with you. But if you only were able to talk with and meet 20 people, still, chances are all 20 of them would be one of the 500 people who had 7 billion people they met with. They would "crowd out" the people like yourself who only met 20 people.
In the real world of course nobody meets 7 billion people. But there are people in your city who will meet 200 people, and others who will just meet 2-3. Due to sampling bias, you are more likely to meet the people who meet 200 people than you are to meet the people who meet 2-3 people.
So let's compare two real-world situations:
You join an improv theater group. There are 20 people in it. 3 of them are single. You talk with 3 of them and invite one on a date. What are the chances you will end up in a relationship?
You join tinder. You right-swipe 20 people. 3 of them match with you. You talk with them and invite one on a date. What are the chances you end up in a relationship?
In the first case, it is still more likely that the people who are in your theater group also belong to many other groups. However, they will not meet 200-500 people every week, because there is a physical limit that limits their time. So when you see those 3 single people, it is likely that you are one of just a few that they have in their life as potential partners. It is likely they will agree to go on a date with you. It is likely they will enter a relationship with you. Remember, in our grandparents' day, it was enough for a boy and a girl to live on the same street, they'd get married for 50 years. Or go to the same school, etc.
In the second case, the chances that the 3 people matched with you also matched with 150 people is much higher, due to there being no limit on the number of people they can match with. The physical limit of not being able to match with 200-500 people disappears. Therefore, for statistical reasons almost surely all 3 of them are from that group. When you invite them on a date, if they agree it is highly likely that they agree because they go on dates with everyone.
The chances that you will end up in a relationship with them are almost nil.
For these reasons, under the improv theater scenario, if you like someone you might have an excellent chance to enter a relationship with them. Under the tinder scenario you will have almost no chance.
However, as regards one night stands, suddenly the situation is very different: you have an excellent chance of meeting people who have fucked 25-40 people of your gender in the past year. You will have an excellent chance of fucking them.
All this makes Tinder an excellent vector for venereal disease, and also an excellent place to hook up. It makes it a terrible place for dating and entering relationships.
(Though I've done so in the past. For the most part the people I entered relationships with ones that my friends told me I could/should do much better than.)