N

Objectively, the answer is Game Theory Voting. However, it is basically impossible to explain to, well, anyone.
The idea is that, given any two ranked-ballot voting methods, we can compare how many voters prefer the winner of one over the winner of the other, and vice versa. Essentially, treating the ballots as giving head-to-head votes between the candidates who would win under each method.
On average, in the long run, game theory voting will produce winners who are preferred by as many or more voters than the winner produced by any other method. In other words, there is no ranked-ballot voting system whose winners are preferred by more voters than the game-theory winner, over the long run.
It is a Condorcet method, and indeed a Smith method, however the actual tiebreaking procedure is a linear optimization problem, which can be solved using, eg. the simplex method, to find each candidate’s optimal probability of winning. The winner is then selected with those probabilities.