Untangle that wrangle

With Americans becoming increasingly exasperated by the election deadlock, BBC News Online's Ryan Dilley looks at the best ways to settle tricky disputes.

It seems only fitting that a complex and well-tried voting system should decide who wins the most powerful public office in the world - the presidency of the United States.

After days of agonising electoral deadlock, legal challenges and recounts, many American voters are desperate for a conclusion - with a coin toss, if necessary.

So what are the best ways to settle an argument?

---

Leave it to chance

It may be a familiar way to start a sporting event, but at least one disgruntled US voter has suggested that the presidential battle be decided by a flip of the coin.

Well, it's one answer to the deadlock

Sheer madness? Well, it wouldn't be the first time an American election has come down to "heads or tails?"

In May, two candidates for the Pine Hill School Board in New Jersey were tied at 177 votes apiece. Rather than pay for a recount out of their own pockets, or ask locals to foot the $3,000-bill for a new ballot, the pair opted for a coin toss.

When the gold dollar came up tails, Patricia Dilks saw her chances of influencing education policy in Camden County dashed for another three years.

Parts of America's "Wild West" take a certain pride in such unorthodox ways of breaking political stalemate.

The citizens of Estancia, New Mexico, seem to see nothing wrong with chance taking a hand in their mayoral elections.

In 1998, political hopefuls James Farrington and Jo Ann Carlson both polled 68 votes. A coin flip and a hand of five-card stud poker later, and Mr Farrington was moving into City Hall.

"Come on, Bill. Double or quits on the next flip."

If New Mexico is forced into its own presidential recount, and Al Gore and George W Bush tie, a CNN commentator suggested the contest could be settled by flipping a nickle.

Of course, there are limits to the 50/50 odds of the coin toss. Ask Kentucky's Judge Kenneth Conliffe.

A jury in his court decided that a suspect tried for killing his girlfriend was guilty of something, but couldn't decide what.

The 12 agreed to toss a silver dollar to choose between a sentence for murder or one for the lesser crime of manslaughter.

Judge Conliffe ordered a retrial.

---

Find a mathematical formula

Presidential tussles aside, there can be few disputes as acrimonious as a divorce. But even in the midst of raging emotions, the calming hand of science can offer some solutions.

"Laptop, 100 points. Carpet, 5 points."

Two New York academics have devised a mathematical model to help warring couples divide up their joint possessions as dispassionately as possible.

The "adjusted winner" formula requires each party to give a points value to disputed items, then divide the spoils so both receive the same share of points.

It's intended to avoid the "envy" factor, which may cause an individual to feel they may have been short-changed in the settlement.

---

Let the expert decide

If you seek the help of the appropriate expert early enough, you may save yourself the bother of deciding how many points a Celine Dion album is worth.

Julia Coles, from the relationship support charity Relate, says counselling can help solve many disagreements.

"I'm going to get the 'helicopter view' on this."

"If two people are locked in a problem they can go round and round, almost unable to see the wood for the trees, as it were."

Ms Coles says talking to a third party can give protagonists a "helicopter view" of their situation.

"They can see what has triggered their problems, what the other person wants, what steps they can take to solve the situation. They get the wider picture."

It's not only couples who can benefit from such attention. Battling businesses can resolve disputes without being dragged into court.

"Arbitration is now a truly viable alternative to court. It's swift, efficient and cheap," says a legal counsel from the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIA).

In arbitration, warring companies agree a neutral figure charged with judging who is in the right. This person is often an expert from the field in which the dispute occurred.

"By, in effect, choosing their judge, the parties can feel very empowered, in a way they might not by handing over the case to a lawyer in court. Expert arbitrators also understand all the technical jargon a more conventional judge may not," says the CIA spokeswoman.

Arbitration will keep you out of the papers

Arbitrators are under a mandatory obligation to keep costs in proportion to the claim being heard. Their decision is also binding and open to only limited appeals.

"This is attractive to many companies, who want to get back to business, and not be dogged by an ongoing dispute."

Another advantage of the process is that hearings are generally confidential, and don't result in either bickering party being splashed across the front pages.

Messers Gore and Bush have already experienced that fate, so perhaps it's too late for such reasoned measures.

Scissors, paper, stone anyone?