This is what poker money used as an average does to the active contingent. I do think the winner needs to be adjusted up to near half the pot, but I'd resist working backwards too much (i.e. who you want to see ranked as the best and then figuring out what gives you that answer)

Summer probably needs to play more than two games to be considered, but she's going to win any average contest in either system (there are others with only two games on that list that have done well, like SensFan).
The alternative if you really want to do a "lifetime winnings" thing is to act as if each player pays in $92875 to start and only gets back what's on the lists (although I'd probably make it 100k and adjust everything else to match that so people can more easily understand). So some people will go into debt and some people will come out on top. In the poker tables, the breakeven point is at 5 for 16 and 7 for 30 players (using the current unadjusted poker numbers).
The weakness with using average over total is that it might discourage someone like Summer from playing again, whereas a system that requires a pay-in and tracks totals would not.
.