One oddity of the ranking based on the last 30 games is that the ranking depends as much on the 30th game leaving the ranking as the most recent game.

For example, if you get second place and bump out a first place game, your rank goes down, but if you get 6th place and bump out a 9th place game, your rank goes up.

what about applying a weighting factor to say the 31-35th game so that they are worth progressively less...e.g. 80%, 60%, 40%, 20%...to ease the effect of the game leaving the ranking?

I had also noticed this thing, but that's okay for me.
It's an incentive in order that you don't lower your guard and you play as best you can.

I don't know if you noticed that lately the quality game has improved. Before I could see up to 7 allin at first hand. Now it's rare to see one.

At best, you might consider taking only the best 25 games score of the last 30 (or best 30 last 35), so to eliminate suddenly program crash or internet malfunction or any game left due to unexpected personal commitments.

sneaky wrote:
Possible sure, but it will be a matter of priorities. Shall we improve the current system, or should we discuss and work on a really good one like elo?