[shevek]

Say I am running a 2-session, cumulative, IMP-scored event, separate NS & EW fields, so dual winners.

So with 14 tables, can run 7 x 4 boards, then EW keep moving, do the same in the second session, playing all opponents & all boards.
15 tables might do the same, need a web and 3 sets but that is okay. Will miss one opponent.

What about 16 tables?
Doing the same as above means missing two opponents, 8 boards worth.
The simple alternative is running 3-board rounds, but that means playing two opponents twice, 6 boards worth.
Which is fairer?
Is there another reasonably simple solution?

[gordontd]

Is there a reason why you have to play 56 boards? Is 48 not enough?
In principle though, it's better to play everyone, but more boards against some of them, than to miss some out. Neither is popular though and will inevitably lead to lots of hard luck stories.
Maybe the compromise is to play 8x3 followed by 8x4.