I agree in principle, and having new data affect the interpretation of old results was one of the goals for the rating system for a game I run [0]. But while I

I agree in principle, and having new data affect the interpretation of old results was one of the goals for the rating system for a game I run [0]. But while I believe it's the right thing to do if the goal is to predict results more accurately, there are downsides. Basically players want rating systems to be reward loops; they hate systems where their rating can change randomly, and they want the system to be very volatile in response to their own results. If they go on a statistically insignificant winning streak, they want their ratings to shoot up. Not a rating system to go "meh, it's probably just random chance". [0] https://www.snellman.net/blog/archive/2015-11-18-rating-system-for-asymmetric-multiplayer-games/ https://www.snellman.net/blog/archive/2015-11-18-rating-syst...