Klarner's theorem (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/KlarnersTheorem.html) says in a special case that you cannot tile a $10 \times 10$-board with $1\times 4$-tiles (that can also be rotated and used as $4 \times 1$-tiles). The reason is simple, for $1 \leq n,m \leq 10$, there are more pairs $(n,m)$ with $n+m=2$ modulo $4$ than pairs $(n,m)$ with $n+m=0$ modulo $4$, whereas each $1 \times 4$-tile covers every congruence class exactly once.
The proof can be easily visualized by coloring the board according to the congruence class of $n+m$ modulo $4$. This is the basis of a model in the math museum "Erlebnisland Mathematik" in Dresden (see http://www.erlebnisland-mathematik.de/en/portfolio/der-satz-von-klarner/), where you can try to tile the board and the coloring appears after pressing the "help"-button.
Now, recently, when showing the model to a group of pupils I claimed that the abstract argument above has the virtue of saving a lot of time, since the number of maximal coverings by $1 \times 4$-tiles (the end of each attempt to cover the whole board) is so large, that it is impossible to try them all in order to see that none is covering the whole board. But was I right?
Question: How large is the number of maximal coverings of an $10 \times 10$-board by $1 \times 4$-tiles approximately.
I do not know if this is a research question, but I also do not know where to start looking for estimates.