Percentage scoring is by far the most unfair and unbalanced scoring method for any tournament. You can check Deca2000 and see how it really doesn't work that well.(posted 9391 days ago)I can see two main reasons for this:
1. When a game has a maximum possible score (example Track and Field) then all the top scores are bunched together and a vast majority of people score 95% or over - what's the point of this? You gain no possible advantage if you're in 2nd place compared to someone who may be in 9th place if the scores are so close.
2. Only the 1st place score really has any effect on the tournament once several scores are in place. You gain no real advantage over a fellow competitor in 5th place in you score 4th place, especially of the 1st place score is way out in front - see Deca2000's Burgertime for a classic example of this. In order to make any difference to the overall scores you have to be 1st.
This shows that percentages don't work - and that in order to beat a person you just have to play overall better in total scoring, and if you lose just one game by a huge margin it may not be possible to catch up. This means you could be slightly better on 9 games and still lose - does this mean you are not the better player? No.
Whereas MARPs tournament scoring method rewards overall placings, and you beat a person in 10 games if you place better in 6 games, which is fair.
There is no method that can please everyone and which would prove to work best in all circumstances, but I'm sure that the percentage system is by far the worst.
Crash.