OK KDicefreak, I will try to explain why both awes and me think it is more relevant to have a "reasonable" limit on # games played before luck% can be taken into account for the luck rank.

As you seem to understand, luck is (or should be!) in theory the same for everyone. Luck evens out the more you play.

So if I asked you, a player with 10 games and a luck% of 57% or another one with 200 games at 54% which one do you consider the most lucky. It's debateble but I would consider someone at 200 54% avg a very lucky player.
The more games are played, the morethe same 50+% is impressive.

Take a player with 200 games at 47% lucky avg. I am sure you will find a streak of 10 games where his luck avg for those 10 is 60%.

It's also the reason why we have monthly ranking races and not weekly or daily medals. I am sure if you had a good day, most good kdice players could take a top5 spot in the day rank but after a month of playing better players always tend to finish higher.