I'm non inwards favour of changing chess merely because a few super-tournaments convey likewise many draws. I mean value it is ameliorate to address tournament formats, fourth dimension controls as well as the mix of players.
Here's my idea. In elite tournaments, where the players are just likewise damned skillful at defending bad positions, nosotros let them to play their classical games precisely every bit now, alongside the same fourth dimension command as well as describe rules as well as rating changes, etc, as well as they marking 1-½-0 every bit now. The departure is that every describe has to endure followed past times a #BonusBlitz tie-break tally of ii blitz games (further sets of ii games or maybe an Armageddon if they halt 1-1) for an extra ½ point on the scoreboard for the winner. The players larn ushered into a especial TV studio alongside enough of cameras as well as commentators on manus as well as then that the audience tin savour them to the max. So the scoring organization becomes 1 betoken (if y'all win the classical or the blitz decider), ½ (if y'all describe the classical game but lose the #BonusBlitz) as well as 0 (if y'all lose the classical game).
I'm non a statistician / mathematician / logician as well as then I imagine there'll endure holes to alternative inwards my thought but peradventure it's worth debating. It would relieve us from dreary results tables similar the 1 above. And the bonus from the spectator betoken of thought is that y'all are guaranteed to run across to a greater extent than or less blood spilt, come upwards what may.
EDIT: inwards reply to the well-made first comment below I'm wondering whether a betoken organization of 3-2-1-0 mightiness endure ameliorate (3 for a classical win, 2 for a blitz win, 1 for a blitz loss, 0 for classical loss).