Just to get things straight: Let's say we have 2 riders, jumping exactly to the same height. Rider 1 takes his board between the legs and makes a handle pass megaloop. Definitely a high risk factor, especially since no one even tried it before. Now comes rider 2 and makes a normal megaloop but so near to the beach, that a gust would shoot him on itl. Rider 2 should be the winner and it's not even close as he was seriously risking his life.
Im pretty sure when using risk to assign a score to a move in a comp it has nothing to do with risks the rider adds to the equation with things like proximity to the beach or other riders etc. Its the risk inherent in the move itself that would also obviously be affected by amplitude, height, power, wind etc.
The argument "why don't we just go back to 2 line kites with no release and no leash" is a red herring argument. Risk as a judging criteria is about pushing the sport to its limit within the context of world class riding, not regression for the sake of added risk.