Player rating for tournaments across all installments of Heroes.

Auto-translated

Actually, the bonus will range from almost 0 (if players simply "don't play" the tournament) to 50, if they perform twice as well as expected.

Be more objective; for the leaders, the bonus will most often range from 20 to 30.

If you've noticed, the leaders' results are almost always the same (fluctuations are around 1/10 of the total rating). In the grand scheme of things, this isn't too important.

Exactly, that's what I noticed. Therefore, this is absolutely not a bonus based on the strength of the tournament, but rather an unclear addition, almost constant. And you can't track the difference between a warm-up tournament and a major one.

Wouldn't you want fewer tournaments to always award more points than more tournaments?

I'm sorry, but I wrote

If you want to "hold back" the leaders, then the final effective rating should take into account its average value. Or you could limit the number of tournaments per year, for example, to 12. If they play more, they choose the best results. But is that necessary?

You have greatly distorted my thought. I was just saying that your bonus won't help to get closer to the leaders, and may even hinder it.
Although you should understand that the additive nature of the rating hides unpleasant and inevitable pitfalls.

Reading content in

Interface language

Player rating for tournaments across all installments of Heroes.