I agree that it might be worth adjusting the importance of the second indicator, i.e., applying a constant (or perhaps a variable) decreasing coefficient to it. I just don't have any ideas about what that coefficient should be... I won't pull it out of thin air, and I don't know how to justify it yet...
You know, I've always thought that the rating is calculated as the sum of the results of different unrelated tournaments. It is unlikely that there are methods to directly link the results of one tournament with the results of another. The main thing is that all participants in each tournament are in different conditions... Take the triathlon - how can you link a cycling race and swimming? In no way. But as a sum of results (the speed of completing a stage), it can be linked. The main thing is that all participants complete all stages under equal conditions...
Added 7 minutes later
Damn, where did you erase some of the formula's outlines? Check it against my silly example in comparison with two stages and a different group of participants; the examples are above in the thread, there's your normal example on one stage and my silly one with 1000 days on the other.