Grand Chess Tour. Final?

As you know, everyone in football understands, and everyone understands how to conduct competitions and how to accrue points.

Watching the great competition - Grand Chess Tour. I like everything ... Commentators - Glitter! If I were still in English ... But this is Zhenya Miroshnichenko ... Not only is he my namesake and speaks good Russian, but sometimes he says that, then I often thought myself, but he was too shy to voice it. Well, you know from the field how to count, what to count, why to count ... The E-rating is continuous, in a word ...

But the finals ... The first two matches look with interest For us ordinary fans, not for the pros. But the competition itself is for us, not for them. Of the second two matches it looks with interest, adrenaline only one for the first place. The second match for the third and the participants and spectators are much less interesting - “margarine”.
- And what is margarine? - asked the heroine of an old Soviet story.
- Margarine, well, it's like butter, but not the butter answered her interlocutor.
Then there was one butter - butter ... We did not know about palm oil.

So, 2 rounds - 4 matches, of which 3 are “butter” and 1 is “margarine”. Remember.

Criticism must be constructive. During the first five-year plans there was even a slogan. You criticize - offer! Relocate - do it! It was a romantic time ...

What I offer. And let's change the logic of the finale. And to descend from heaven to earth, we will look at the current Grand Chess Tour finals in London.

So, in the first pair of matches Ding Liren defeated Aronian, Vashier Lagrave defeated Carlsen

Now we are waiting for an interesting match Ding Liren - Vashier Lagrave and “margarine” match Aronian - Carlsen ...

But if I were the “director", I would suggest playing two other matches Ding Liren - Carlsen and Vashier Lagrave - Aronian.
Here both Aronyan and Carlsen arise in excess of motivation - the right to prove that they are not “suckers” and put an end to them early ... Well, Ding Liren and Vasya Lagrave are understandable in the game mood .. And now we would have two more matches with hyper motivation for both participants and fans ... That is, a sporting event with interest is even higher than in the first round.

So what if both matches end the same way, then this requires a THIRD round. But essentially different depending on the result
1. In both matches, “yesterday's” winners lost, then we play a blitz match of four in several circles until one clear winner is announced. Details can be clarified ...
2. In both matches, “yesterday's” winners win, then they play the match, and the losers wiping their tears fraternally simply share the remainder of the prize cake they got.
3. Finally, if one “yesterday's” winner wins and the second loses, then the winner of the finals is declared. The loser honestly gets him the 4th piece of the prize cake.
And the two remaining fraternally share 2-3 prizes.

What is the bottom line?

1. A headache for the organizers - it is necessary to provide for not 2 stages, but another third - a backup that may or may not be.

2. We are guaranteed to have 4 interesting matches in the first two stages. And probably 1 more interesting match or interesting blitz tournament in the same

That's about ...