The scoring in Boulder WCs must be more understandable, logical and fair

In most Boulder World Cups, the official commentators mislead the audience by analyzing the scoring in a wrong way. Another common problem can be that, "who seems to be the best" does not win. This relates to the fact you only score at the top and on a bonus hold. In the last WC, the #6 ranking was best overall measured of the bonus. One way to make the scoring more understandable and logical could be to give three, respectively six (or 4 and 8) points two bonus holds and ten points for the top. This goes in line with how IFSC score Lead and in fact, many big boulder comps have other scoring that are more understandable. Advantages for such point scoring system beside being more understandable and also more logical is that it gives more credit and is more fair for the guys with not so good results. In the last world championship, half of the male did not get any top and presenting results, #55 did only get three bonus seems pretty lame or even worse for #79, with just one bonus. Instead, with more bonuses related to points the results would be more fair and also not almost shameful. Dividing tied score would be done in the same way as today, based on the number of attempts. What do you think, wouldn't the point system be more understandable, logical and fair?