removing winning streak from tournaments

I believe there is no point in streak, there should be no difference between (for instance) WLWLWL and WWWLLL

(W = win, L = lose)

Chess was originally played without clocks. The reason clocks were added is because some players would begin to take monumental amounts of time in ways that were seemed aimed at irritating or inconveniencing their opponent, rather than because they were genuinely productively thinking about their move. One game between Staunton and Pierre St. Amant reportedly took 14.5 hours to complete a 66 move game. And you also didn't lose the game if you ran out of time, instead you were fined.

They certainly weren't added with the idea in mind of creating micro-time games where the clock becomes nearly as important as the moves, and in some time controls even more so. But people went this direction because it was entertaining and fun. So too here with the rules for the tournament. Of course there's no objective rationale for this system, but it's fun and entertaining for spectators and players alike, so - why not?

@OhNoMyPants Very interesting reply. You took me for a ride, didn't know where I was going to be taken until we reached there.

I have to politely disagree here, clocks weren't added to make the game fun (it already is) but to prevent the unfairness of time misuse. On the same line what I mentioned about winning streaks is also to prevent the unfairness of giving more points to a random win-lose game sequence.

Please don't get me wrong on the fun side here, I used and abused the berserk option when we had it because berserking really added another dimension of fun to the game, which was at the same time fair (you could win an extra point but at the cost of losing half the available time)

However the winning streak is (IMHO) not really fun nor fair, not mentioning that it doesn't add anything to the game because any player would want to win all the games she/he can in a row anyway