Why is this not a draw?

Because they are like: 'Whatever, in 999 games out of 1000 these positions are draw, so lets draw this shit'. And to me THIS makes perfect sense, in an internet context, where no referee is there to decide (which is a difference to FIDE tourns).


So... instead of trying to use the correct rules but currently failing in 1 of 1000 cases due to technical limitations (which might improve somewhere in the future), we should instead use rules that are broken by design (also failing in 1 of 1000 cases (there are games where someone e.g. legitimately mates with KB vs. KB after some forcing trades), but without any hope that this "margin of error" can ever be fixed by technological progress)?

Yeah, makes perfect sense.

Are you sure about your claims? I just checked on and:

- when I got to a K+B vs K endgame the game over with the pop-up: Game drawn by insufficient material.

- when I got to a K+B vs K+B (opposite colors) I was allowed to keep on playing, aka not an automatic draw.

I suspect that ICC would also function this way.


Also, by the same "logic" that says "Whatever, let's always draw KB vs. KB", shouldn't something like KP vs. KQ also be a draw if the side with the queen times out? Or KP vs. KQQ? Or KP vs. KR?

Where do you draw the line?

Yes, that position was drawn, even by lost time. I cant grant you the draw, but im pretty sure you could sent a mail to support and get some rating back for it.
Lichess follows fide rules closer, doesnt seem like a bad thing. Easy to fix too, play with increment

Lets also draw k vs k+b+n if king time runs out, 999 out of 1000 of those positions in bullet end up drawn anyway. Or K+p vs K+2N if pawn times out

Yeah, whatever, we had this argument often enough. You just ignore the result statistics of this endgame. Where to draw the line? Wider! single Knight or Bishop is always draw, except opp has pawns. Thats how i would do it. Yes, there are always unfair cases like #29. Thats for technical reasons.