Why is this not a draw?


is why i gave up drinking 10 years ago.... too many bar fights

fighting for a draw in a lost but not trivial position is not the same as getting granted the win in a trivial to draw position which a 1000 can draw against Stockfish.

Further, it was much more probable in this position for him to get mated. So this is not a comparision.

For the records, his win was Kb6 Qb7+ Kc5 Qe7+ Kb6 -+ - both he and i didnt see that defense at this moment. And Kd3 also won, but less trivial. He was planning Kc3 but then saw that this leaves Ra1 unprotected. That position is draw.

who decides if a position is trivial? At which probability to draw is it a draw? The rules are simple enough, if the probability is 0, not 0,000001. Put a random move generator playing. will it sometimes loose? if yes, its possible to loose. it doesnt matter if a position is drawn for a 1000, for a 1500 or 3000, if you dont want to loose, dont run out of time. You cant say 'I ran out of time but i wouldve drawn that position if i kept playing', thats just stupid, because you cant keep playing, you have no time.
I actually get that sometimes people dont know the rules, dont know how a suposedly drawn position of K+B vs K+B, or K+N vs K+N can be lost. But arguing against the rules is ridiculous, specially as the rules make perfect sense here.

"According to your rules", these are the official rules of chess.
You are correct that this should be a draw, but seeing how it's an made up position that's extremely unlikely to happen in a real game, I am not surprised that the system failed to recognize it.