Player rating for tournaments across all installments of Heroes.

The linear rating is calculated using the modified formula of the respected AmberSoler: R(l)=25-25/(m(l)-1)*(m(i)-1), where m(l) is the last place in the tournament, and m(i) is the player's place. The number 25 was chosen after analyzing all the tournaments. In my opinion, the linear component of the rating should not be more than 1/4 of the nonlinear component. But we can argue about these numbers.

Let's consider an example that I couldn't provide until a week ago, so as not to violate the tournament rules – Stage 6 of the VK.
The proposed map turned out to be very easy due to the abundance of starting and joining forces. On such a map, the place taken is the main factor, since it is impossible to differentiate based on the number of days.
The distribution by days is approximately as follows: 7 days – excellent completion, 8 – good, 9 – also not bad, 10 – let's say, average (and let some participants forgive me). Why 10 – because it is from this result that the lower half of the table begins; completing the game in 10 days is easy and straightforward, for example, with 2 boats and one runner, although, if you're lucky, you can get 9.
Objectively, on a 100-point scale, a completion in 10 days (for your level) deserves about 50 points; those with a higher place get a little more, and those with a lower place get less. But what happens if the days and the place are related in a 4 to 1 ratio? It's quite a mess.

Now, a bonus.

1. R(b)=R(tr)/R(iSr)*R(l)*k, where R(tr)

I've already said that a person shouldn't suffer because they completed the previous tournament well, but you stubbornly disagree. As a result, let's look again at Stage 6 of the VK. Romanuel, vbn, and Fireball showed very similar completions. Only vbn didn't take the +2 magic artifact and didn't focus on one parameter. I chose the artifact, but ignored one parameter, although I knew it was possible. Romanuel did everything perfectly. AlexR's completion is better conceptually, more precise and accurate. But in the rating, he is only in 2nd place!!! And only because Romanuel did not participate in Stage 1??? Although, ideally, Alex should have a good lead. It's some kind of nonsense.

2. R(b)=k*R(l),

Perhaps this is better than the first option, but it's still not quite right. If the ratings reflect the real strength and the maps are not too easy for the participants, then the coefficient k will always be quite close to one (that's how you defined it). That is, this is only formally a bonus, and in reality, the ratio of the linear and nonlinear ratings from 1 to 4 will become 1 to 2. In short, this is clearly not a bonus.

Summary. Looking at your two proposals, the Kamikaze system, and the 6 stages of the VK, an ordinary forum user (assuming he has good attention and logic) should exclaim:
"Long live the oscillator!!!"