text: @jack-waugh To me, a Borda strategy is more like filling the upper middle ranks with unknown fringe candidates. This backfires horribly when everyone does it.
  I thought about it more today, though. There are five differences between my method and traditional Borda:
  The Borda calculations are performed only within the finalist set, which is extremely restrictive
  Equal ranks are allowed
  Skipped ranks are ignored
  There's no ballot completion requirement
  It uses tournament-style Borda count, which is a bit different
  I think all of this combined is what allowed my method to hold up so well against Marcus' Borda strategies (which I didn't mention earlier). Regardless, the more rigorous testing, the better.
  @jack-waugh The fact that it's only a Borda count among the tied candidates matters. It would be easier to try to cheat Copeland's directly than to cheat the Borda count at the end. Although Copeland strategy and Borda strategy do have a fair bit in common.