No checkmating material left on the board still it was declared win to whom, has the Bishop,

> You are contradicting yourself.

If you think so you just not understood me correctly.

Then please explain how KNvKN is a draw. And after that please explain why KpvKQQQQQQQ is not a draw.

You are asking me to write a lot of obvious thigns, many of them I wrote before. May be I shall write them again, but

1. this is not my interest here (I am interested in something new, like @Toadofsky's thread on probabilities) and

2. it seems that it is not the best way to change mind of proponents of FIDE's rules.

Not even Magnus can claim a draw against you just because your odds of mating him are 0,0000000001%

No, you haven't answered this. Neither are they obvious.

Generally when white wins on time with a pawn against x material no one bats an eye. But when it's a knight or a bishop it's the end of the world. It makes no sense. There needs to be a fair objective system in place that solves these problems without using a lot of resources. Using an engine to calculate probabilities and then find a way to discrimininate on positions based on this is not only unreasonable, it's also a very bad idea.

In a 500 years, when chess is solved to a draw, cyborgs will whine about losing on time in this position:

lichess.org/analysis/standard/rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR_w_KQkq_-

#29 I continue to advocate that the default Quick Pairing TCs should be 5+1 and 10+2, precisely to deal with situations in slower games where a player could easily draw if only they had 1-2 seconds per move to shuffle pieces.

> #29 I continue to advocate that the default Quick Pairing TCs should be 5+1 and 10+2, precisely to deal with situations in slower games where a player could easily draw if only they had 1-2 seconds per move to shuffle pieces.

Increment is really very good. (Personally I think that 3+3 game is much more deeper that even 5+0) But this site owner made a wrong decision to zero increment in berserk games.

Also, a majoritiy of 2600+ games that I see is without increment. Do you have any ideas how to make games with increment to be popular?

> Using an engine to calculate probabilities and then find a way to discrimininate on positions based on this is not only unreasonable, it's also a very bad idea.

Where did you find me proposing such an idea?!

BTW, probability is a tool to analyze human perception of FIDE/USCF rules on a set of some notable games/postions and not the tool to decide the result of each lichess game just after its end. It is one of obvious ideas that I assumed to be obvious to anyone without my explanation.

@mle

Hey dude, FUN FACT:
A lot of players enjoy no increment, you happen to be in the minority :)

The more you know...