How about the idea of offering three computer consulations per tournament per each player. Each player has the option of consulting Fritz (supervised of course) at any three intervals at some point during the tournament.

I've been toying with a couple of ideas for spicing up tournaments. And since the club I belong to, as well as Malmö's chesslife in general, is rather dormant I suppose I won't get the chance to try either of them in practice... So, I thought I'd post them here and see if anyone gets inspired to try them. 

The first is an idea we can call Ragnarök, of how to limit the number of quick draws at the top tables in big tournaments. The idea is very simple: the whole tournament ends when one player is alone at first place after each completed round. 

Theoretically one downside would be that it could be over after one round, if one guy wins and all others draw. So with few participants one should perhaps raise the limit to one player leading by a one point margin. (or the tournament could go on to decide who'll be sole 2nd, if less than say 5 rounds have been played.)

The other downside is of course that a tournament might drag on indefinitely, though I doubt it, one could say the same about e.g. the 30 second increment in longer games - but it never conflict with the next round in major tournaments with 2 rounds a day. (or at least so I've been told by a local GM)

On the other hand, the upsides are that the top boards will probably always be fighting encounters, as a draw between the joint leaders would only allow more to catch up with them. And with no fixed number of rounds, an initial loss or two may still be repairable to come from behind and win the tm. 

- A possible objection could be that it might encourage thrown games, but if that is really a concern, it holds as true for the traditional tm formats too I suppose... 


Idea #2 was inspired by a local Fischer Random tm, but the opposite. Instead of jumbling the pieces, every player in the tm writes down an opening sequence he/she would like to play and lay it in a bowl. And then before every round, the white players draw a note with the opening his/her game will have to take. 

Could be a fun way to vary training tournaments and train on adjusting and improvising, or?

The only downside I see atm is that some horrible sequences might be put in  - still, I doubt anyone would do that, but just in case, everyone could e.g. sign their note, and the one suggesting e.g 1.f4 e6 2.g4?? could be made to play white in that 'opening' every round... 


Any others ideas or insights in why the above is complete rubbish?