So, what would be a suggestion (or plurality thereof) to improve upon the rating system we have? There is no such thing as a perfect one, but if there are flaws, they could be thrashed over, perhaps even rectified.

I just don't think that a lot of time should be spent on it by the players. I mean, I am much more concerned with won-loss records than any rating, which is at best only a rough guide as to how good (or not) a player is. In contrast, numbers of games won and lost are factual, and although they do not necessarily address the strength (or weakness) of opposition, they are still unequivocal.

However, ratings are always fallible, no matter how good the system used. I purport that in most rating systems, about one-third of the players are overrated, about one-third underrated, and about one-third rated fairly close to where they should be. The variance in rating systems won't change that. The only thing which will make rating systems better is longevity; that is, a lot of the players in a certain game type playing a lot of games against the others in that group.