Is there any good reason to automatically make it a draw after 301 moves?
If there needs to be a 300 rule cut off, it would be better if lichess would automatically do an arbiter job and decide that the position is either won for one side, or a draw.
In the above case it would certainly be judged as a win for black.
(Post #4 is spot on - both players are equally allowed to continue to play. No double standards, please!)
@Munich it's not a double standard. If you don't resign you just want to see if your opponent manages to mate you in time. If you don't mate your opponent you're toying with your opponent which is disrespectful. If you mate him you've proven him wrong and shown him that you won't blunder. Any game that is longer than 300 moves is not genuine so I can understand that lichess stops games after 300 moves.
"If you don't mate your opponent you're toying with your opponent which is disrespectful."
No, if at all is disrepectful on both sides (The weaker side has the option to resign, if he does not want to continue). So it is double standards.
Fide Rules are sufficient. The rules, by the way, say that the arbiter can end a game and decide which side has won or if it is a draw.
Lichess misuses its rule as an arbiter, if lichess claims it a draw after 300 moves.
You really need to consider both sides - which you dont, so it is indeed double standards.
You don't get my point: If you have the weaker side and think there is a possibility that your opponent will blunder (which is not unlikely - especially in bullet) you continue because you gain nothing by resigning but by not resigning you can get some draws or even wins. If you have the stronger side and you think you won't blunder you prove that by mating your opponent. By not mating your opponent you can't win more games, you only do something for your ego which is disrespectful towards your opponent.
@Chillkroete77 I couldn't agree more! It's annoying and disrespectful.
@Munich the rule is probably there to prevent endless trolls. It makes no sense to have an arbiter decide to let the person win anyway.
@Chillkroete77,
@GBA87 I agree that if you have a small chance to save half a point, it is ok to continue playing. But my opponent continued to play even though
1. He had a bare king against a rook and 4 pawns
2. It was a bullet game with 1 second increment, I had plenty of time
3. Stalemate was not a possibility
4. Draw by threefold repetition or 50-move rule was not an option (4 pawns on the board)
I consider THAT to be annoying and disrespectful. But he chose to play on - cool, I chose to play on too. From now on I'll take the 300 move limit into consideration.
So what? As long as you don't mate him, he hasn't lost. Because of that there is a chance for him to draw, by stalemate (always possible), if you forget the time (even if it's increment) or if you accidentally make 50 moves with your king. He does not have to resign because the game will end anyway and you only resign if you don't think that your opponent will blunder. You on the other hand have to mate him because otherwise the game doesn't end. Because of all these arguments, not resigning and not mating are not two symmetrical options of playing on and cannot be compared.
Still, I dont get the point why one silly guy gets rewarded (gets the half point), while the other is punished for bein silly (loses half a point).
Besides, as said, it is against fide rules. If lichess ends the game as an arbiter, the decision must be objective to the position.
There is no punishment for people who let their time run out.
And "punishment" should not be used to change ratings. Rating changes affect future opponents. The side who had a lost position gets a too high rating (plus a reward for being silly), while the side who had the won position gets a surpressed rating (and a punishment for being silly).
There is a resing button, and there is no reaon why not to use it.
If the lost side decides to continue, he may.
But dont tell me it is not silly on both sides.
The ratings are thought to display the strength of a player. You can get banned for sandbagging. You can get banned for artificially increasing your rating (with the help of a computer program for instance).
But here? Lichess is artificially increasing one sides rating, while it decreases the other sides rating. Really, lichess should stick to fide rules. And if it does not, it should indicate as a warning that the last 50 moves are starting before the game will end in a draw.
Otherwise, lichess is misusing its role as an arbiter.
You're right, Lichess should just ban players who troll by playing 300+ move games.
Playing 300 moves is an act of benevolence. It keeps at least 1 troll out of the game pool at one's own expense. Pls make a trophy for it.
