First of all, incredible work! This is a great place to start and indeed, will be sufficient for most purposes as-is for quite some time while refinement is done.
My first initial thought regarding the ratings is that it needs some kind of Strength of Opponent formula to count as a minor percentage of the final weighed, result. Right now (correct me if I’m wrong), you have a baseline of established numbers imported from a similarly-set up (successful) system, which assigns static values to tournaments based on a cross-indexed, weighed ratio of the top 8 players to determine what level the tournament falls, and people are provided scores accordingly.
I think you need to go further, something along the lines of Microsoft’s TrueSkill system. That way you can have an independent value of every player in every tournament, and that would allow you to more accurately gauge the level of competition in a given tournament outside the top 8. Large formats like EVO - which of course would be top-ranked because the final 8 are impeccably credentialed - are actually underrated under the existing system. Regardless of skill, shit does happen, bad matchups do occur, and the deeper the pool beyond that top 8, the more difficult it is to assess just how hard it is to get there in the first place. You may have a tournament where Poongko slips into the top 8 due to a string of favorable matchups, while Laugh arrives there by overcoming long odds. The result is the same, but the path to get there reveals a very different sort of measurable metrics. The benefits of a more evolved system like this would not only give you more accurate ratings, it would allow you to present the information in all kinds of interesting in unique ways not currently possible: Tangible data on character advantages, match histories of specific players, strength of bracket in a current tourney (who had to work harder to get there), etc. You’d also be able to forgive people outside of the top 16 easier if they just unfortunately happened across Daigo or Infiltration in their bracket. The real story is found in discovering the value of disparity in each individual matchup.
Hopefully that all makes sense, and please do not take any of this as criticism. I’m just excited to see someone doing interesting things with the data and hoping to be helpful and encouraging as possible.