This is common. When we suggest possible reviewers, we choose the most competent experts in the area. We expect from the reviewers the professional comments of the highest quality to improve the paper. This does not guarantee the positive review. If you have a conflict with a possible reviewer assigned by the editor, you have to mention in the cover letter the names of persons and the reason why you don't want them as reviewers.

Dear Leonid V Vladimirov , just a quick comment. Based on the comments of reviewer you can often identify who is the reviewer.

Dear Ljubomir Jacić None " approach can ..guarantee impartial peer review " It depends much on the journal an on the editor

Such practice is very often! This approach can not guarantee impartial peer review, while the quality is questionable.

I have been a reviewer for several International Journals. The name of the reviewer was never disclosed to the authors. I think it is the only way to correctly evaluate the quality of the submitted paper.

This is common. When we suggest possible reviewers, we choose the most competent experts in the area. We expect from the reviewers the professional comments of the highest quality to improve the paper. This does not guarantee the positive review. If you have a conflict with a possible reviewer assigned by the editor, you have to mention in the cover letter the names of persons and the reason why you don't want them as reviewers.

Dear Leonid V Vladimirov , just a quick comment. Based on the comments of reviewer you can often identify who is the reviewer.

Dear Ljubomir Jacić None " approach can ..guarantee impartial peer review " It depends much on the journal an on the editor

Dear Adel Badri ,

you don't need to thank any comment. If you like one, recommend it

When I suggested experts, I got great useful suggestions. In a well-known magazine, I got ridiculous reviews, and later I saw that something like my dismissed work was published by experts from the area.......

Most wanted that to authors and reviewers are not known to each other.

Biljana Maluckov As a reviewer almost in each case I can deduce the name of at least one author. There is no sense to hide the authors names.

I did not understand your first post. Did you suspect that the reviewer rejected your work and then published something similar to yours?

Such practice is very common, but I don't think it would guarantee impartiality.

I as a reviewer does not like to see the author's name.

Dear Yurii V Geletii,

Yes, I suspect that the reviewer rejected my work and then published something similar to my.

Biljana Maluckov . This might happen. I would write the letter to the Editor, where your paper has been rejected, and ask for a clarification. If the reviewer indeed acted as you explained, the Editor must raise the question of non-ethical behavior of the reviewer. Such cases are very seriously taken in top journals.

As per advice, I responded to the editor regarding the reviewers 's funny and rude comments when the paper was rejected, but he said that he had confidence in the reviewer. After my objection, the editor had to do it a new review with new reviewers.

Biljana Maluckov What was the opinion of the second reviewer? Did the Editor assign the third reviewer?

Now, after publishing the similar paper you have the right to ask the Editor for a clarification, but don't discuss the Editor's decision to reject your paper.

Suggesting a pool of reviewers to journals is very cumbersome. I personally find it very difficult to recommend potential reviewers to a journal.

Perhaps justifies an empirical study of the bias/variance/covariance dilemma (aka the "optimal" diversification) and related to real-world problems in selecting funding application reviews (as in the EU funding programmes; 3 reviewers are common) and investment appraisals. I am afraid I am not aware of any published empirical studies.

Dear Adel Badri , there is related research question with some good resources and recommendations, tips on how to suggest peer reviewers.

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Choosing_Reviewers_for_Paper

Guidelines for Suggesting Peer Reviewers for Manuscripts

https://imechanica.org/node/14942

https://dynamicecology.wordpress.com/2012/12/19/advice-how-to-suggest-referees/

Dear Adel Badri , this is fine COPE case about suggested peer-reviewers.

Authors often suggest reviewers for their papers.  The topic of submitted manuscripts can be very narrow and it is helpful, at times, for editors to be directed to possible content experts.  Case 12-12 illustrated the pitfalls of using only the suggested reviewers.  In this case, after an unusual pattern of very positive and very fast reviews were noted for papers of a particular author, the editors asked the author to explain.  The author admitted that the provided emails either were not legitimate and were under the author’s control or were those of colleagues who provided favorable reviews.

This manipulation of the peer review process is egregious and potentially criminal.  The author admitted fraud, raising concerns about other papers she or he had submitted. The case provides a strong cautionary tale for editors regarding selecting reviewers as well.  

https://publicationethics.org/news/when-peer-review-process-goes-sideways

I don't think it is a good approach...Journals should be able to identify the suitable reviewers by themselves, by checking CVs, researchgate, google scholar,...

And also by checking new reviewers in Publons platform.