lichess.org
Donate

Any game longer than 300 moves adjudicated as a draw?

He is very unlikely to lose: His opponent had 300 moves to checkmate him and didn't do it, so he either isn't able to checkmate you or he doesn't want to. Either way you play on.
but chillkroete, you are basically confirming the issue with "...had 300 moves ... you play on".
Probably that was not your intention, but see, my point is that the 300 move rule gives an incentive to play on.
Now imagine there was no 300 move rule - why should he play on then and not resign?

eventual the game would end in a check mate. Longest game possible by my rough estimation is "just" this: 8 pawns can make 7 moves = 56, plus 8 promoted pawns (queens) lead to 8 captures, plus 7 initial pieces lead to another 7 captures.
In total max moves of captures and pawn moves are 56+8+7 = 71. Now with the 50 move rule that results in "just"
71 x 50 = 3550 moves.

Practically, though, games will be shorter, because usually not all pieces and pawns will need every 50 moves to be capture or pawns to be moved. Most likely, some endgame material will remain, so I'd say the average game where one side refuses to check mate (guestimate) wouldnt last longer than 1000 moves.
If there is no realistic hope to gain anything, I can see no other reason to play on but just for the fun of it. The losing side must enjoy it. Unless there is a 300 move draw rule - that would give an incentive to play on, and indirectly you just confirmed it.

Edit: ah, I forgot, the losing side has the same pieces, too, so double the above numbers. However, the losing side has no interest in moving every 50 moves a pawn, unless he wants to reach a record.

Hoping for a disconnect, maybe? (well deserved, karma-wise, for someone who refuses to mate)

Btw, if you write more text than everyone else in the thread, you seriously fail at trolling.
Only the losing side has an incentive to play on. Why TF would that prove your point? How? Why?
@ProfDrHack: Yes, valid point. Well, that means the losing side does not mind to play on. (Besides - if he did, there is always the resign button as an option).

chillkroete77: my point is, that the 300 move rule is an additonal incentive to play on. You confirmed just that (indirectly, by making your last argument dependent on 300 moves).

The 300 move rule can lead to more players not resigning in future, because there is a realistic chance of a draw.
My impression: I know that most people here in favour for the 300 move rule are people who dont resign games. They dont want to get their 300 move goody taken away. That a draw is "deserved" is more meant in a way of punishing the winning side, however, the truth is, the losing side likes to get a draw and thus defends the 300 move rule as fair.

"realistic chance"

How realistic do you think it is to reach 300 moves against a non-trolling opponent?

I can probably count my games that even "only" reached 100 moves on one hand, lifetime, from all sites + OTB.

My impression: You live in alternate reality and your ad hominem argument ("I know that most people here in favour ..." No, you don't.) is so laughable it is sad.
"I know that most people here in favour for the 300 move rule are people who don't resign games."

Actually I think most people here DO resign games, including me :P

The fact that I'm defending a player's right to not resign doesn't mean I don't resign my games.

And anyway, how important is this really? How often do 300 move rated draws happen? Every 1,000 games? Every 10,000 games? This seems far too trivial to deserve over 150 forum posts of arguing.

"There should be no fiddling with the rating, as that affects the rating pool in an unfair manner." How much is the rating pool affected? If I did a ranking of what influences the rating pool the most it would look like:

1. Sandbaggers
2. Cheaters
3. Account closing
4. Bots
...
...
...
67. 300 move rule

From what I've seen, most 300 move games happen between players of similar rating, which means that the rating changes very little because of a draw, by a few points at most. So how is that supposed to skew the rating system?

Playing 300 moves in a game should be a rated draw. If you've played 300 moves, then normally (except in cases where you're trolling) it means you can't checkmate, which is equivalent to having a king vs. king situation, because the player with the advantage can't use his pieces to checkmate. And if you are trolling, then you deserve the draw because trolling is despicable.

A temporary ban wouldn't prevent trolling at all. I get a 10 minute ban? Eh, don't care, I'll do something else while waiting. As you can see temporary bans are not even an effective solution to keep players from letting their time run out!

All this talk about the 300 move rule and draw being unfair... If you don't like this rule, then you are free to play somewhere else. There are so many chess websites, surely you must be able to find one where you can troll for 300 moves without getting punished! What do I hear, you still want to play on Lichess? Then stop whining!
@Chillkroete77 @ProfDrHack

Let's just leave this forum, there's been enough arguing. If we leave, what's he going to do, argue by himself? We'll never convince him of anything so we might as well leave him alone.
Score determined: 0:0, trolling successful.

Good luck and good-bye!

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.