Let us suppose that one uses ranked ballots. ¿How should one count them? Many different ways to count rank ballots exist. Let us start with one of the simplest:

Borda-Count is a very simple system. One gives the last candidate on the ballot 0 points, the next gets 1 point, then 2 points, et cetera. One sums the votes. It is better than Plurality (1st Past the Post), but suffers from the opposite problem:

If only 2 candidates run, the 1st gets 1 more points than the 2nd. If they are 3, the 1st gets ½ as many points as the 2nd. Add another candidate and the 1st gets ⅓ more than the 2nd. This reduction leads to teaming:

Teaming is the opposite of votesplitting. The best way to win with Borda is to run as many candidates as possible. This increases the chances that 1 candidate a party running winning.

Another method for counting ranked choice is Buckling. This is invented in the USA and was used in the Progressive Era. Both Republicans and Democrats joined forces for stopping the use of Bucklin. Its Counting method is thus:

0. Count all votes of a rank.
1. If a candidate or candidates have over 50%, the Candidate furthest over 50% wins.
2. If not, add the votes from the next rank.
3. Go to line # 0.

Because it broke the duopoly, the Republicans and Democrats could not let it exist and in textbooks for Government-run K-12 schools mention it. Killing Buckling was one the greatest bipartisan efforts in US-History.

Condorcet breaks ranked ballots into wins:

1. Hillary Clinton D
2. Jill Stein G
3. Gary Johnson L
4. Donald Trump R

Becomes Hillary Clinton D > Jill Stein G > Gary Johnson L > Donald Trump R. On this ballot, Hillary Clinton D beats all. In 2-candidate matches, she would beat all other candidates. One finds the societal Beat all winner (in hypothetical 2-candidate contests, the candidate which would win against all other Candidates. This is the Condorcet-Winner.

1 interesting ranked voting system from the Progressive Era the Republicans and Democrats killed before it was ever even tried is Oklahoma Primary Electoral System:

The ranks are 1 over n with negative votes allowed. Effectively, it is better Borda:

The 1st choice is always twice as big as the 2nd choice. Here is it works in practice:

2520 is the least common multiple of all integers up to 9.

1:
2520

2:
1260

3:
840

4:
630

5:
504

6:
420

7:
360

8:
315

9:
280

One can crank, skip ranks, and use negative ranks for very bad candidates. One simply sums votes. This worth system from the Progressive Era never got a chance.

We have IRV (instant Runoff Voting), which is repeated rounds of plurality, and like Plurality, is subject to votesplitting.

Under Coombs' Method, each voter rank-orders all of the candidates on their ballot. If at any time one candidate is ranked first (among non-eliminated candidates) by an absolute majority of the voters, that candidate wins. Otherwise, the candidate ranked last (again among non-eliminated candidates) by the largest number of (or a plurality of) voters is eliminated.

Many other ranked systems exist. Personally, I prefer Oklahoma Primary Electoral System.