One for all and all for one 4

Okay, I'll explain it in simple terms.
Two matches are played, and it doesn't matter what the score is – if team 2 wins 2-0 or 1.5-0.5, it is declared the winner. If, after two games, the score is 1-1, a third match is played. If it ends in a draw, the points scored by the captains are counted. If the captains also played to a 1.5-1.5 draw, they play a fourth, decisive game.

This is a good explanation of the playoff games, without any ambiguity. Does this "simple" interpretation correspond to the tournament regulations? Of course not. Perhaps it corresponds to previous team tournaments – probably.

The explanation shows a desire to finish the playoff stage in two games, which is quite reasonable, so as not to prolong the tournament. This is achieved with scores of 2-0 and 1.5-0.5, but not with 1-1. Why, with a score of 1-1, not look at the total number of points scored by the teams (for example, 4-0 and 1-3, is an additional game really needed?), and if the points are equal, why not look at the points scored by the captains? And if they are equal, then look at the scores on the 2nd or even 3rd board and finish the competition in two games, and only in the case of a complete tie, hold an additional game for the teams or captains.

It would be good to clarify the "simple" rules for the final as well, since it is not clear how many games there will be, according to this interpretation, probably 3 games (my version).

In connection with the events regarding my registration in the tournament, I am forced to repeat again – I HAVE NO DESIRE WHATSOEVER TO OFFEND OR HUMILIATE the organizers of the tournament. My statements are aimed only at obtaining a clear, unambiguous regulation for the current tournament or the current playoff stage, or as a basis for the next team tournament.