Can you tell me what they’re hoping to accomplish with this structure?

I can’t comment on sanctioning requirements, but I might be able to offer some alternatives that can accomplish the TO’s goal without being so disruptive.

A six round draft event for 64 players (two drafts) that guarantees a single player on 6-0 at the end but allows all 64 players to play all six rounds.

Sanctioning requirements are a bit iffy*, I believe they cannot choose to apply the ‘sudden death’ rule to anything other than timed single elimination. WER and the tournament rules are built around allowing games and matches to be drawn.
*Probably best to contact WPN about what strictly defines a sanctioned tournament, that's their call.

What does this TO do if players draw a game naturally through simultaneously dying or an unbreakable loop? If prizes are concerned, many TOs just count draws as losses when factoring prizes.

If intentional draws for splits are concerned, that's just how it works unfortunately, players might just intentionally play to time to achieve a draw otherwise and make the experience worse for everyone.

Edited Hary (May 12, 2019 12:31:05 AM)

There is unlikely anything stopping an event being run as double or triple elimination, just requires making sure it's advertised as such.

Based on what I can see in MTR10.4, tournaments are assumed to follow the Swiss pairing algorithm “unless otherwise announced” – so it seems to me that it's open to TOs to announce that the algorithm and structure will work in the manner Cayce described. Obviously that wouldn't be appropriate to a premier event where the fact sheet must operate.

The TO could run the event as Single Elimination with 6 rounds, then after round 1 start a second event with 5 rounds as Single Elimination, then after round 2 another and so on.
This sounds like quite a lot of work though, but it's an idea.