Player rating for tournaments across all installments of Heroes.

As I understand it, some determine the champion (for the year) based on the total points scored, while others use the total rating! In principle, both systems are viable. In this regard, I suggest doing as in boxing: count champions according to two versions. These two systems can produce two champions, but it is quite possible that it will be the same person (absolute champion). Let's say that next year, two scoring systems are introduced simultaneously. Regarding the rating system (where 1st place serves as the benchmark), everything is more or less clear about how to calculate the rating. Problems may only arise in the event of a tie (but with an inequality in the second indicator). For example: the 1st and 2nd places have the same number (of days, skeletons, or experience), but the total skills of the 1st are higher! Then, we need to agree: the 1st receives 100%, and the 2nd receives 99.5%. Regarding the system based on total points. The only problem is how to award points for the player's placement. Since our tournament is considered official only if at least 20 participants apply to participate, I suggest: all participants who make it into the top 20 receive points (1st - 20 points, 2nd - 19 points... 20th - 1 point). We have many people who can show good results, and in order not to offend them, it is quite acceptable to award points to the top 20. I don't know who should decide which system should be used next year, but this person should participate in the discussion and offer something of their own or listen to the opinion of the majority. There is a saying in football: "the score doesn't reflect the game!" So, in order to avoid the saying "the gap (in points) between players doesn't reflect the game," I am inclined towards the rating system (where the benchmark is 1st place)