New rule: after 301 moves the game is declared a draw.

I hope for a real discussion.
The previous thread was closed. Nevertheless, it is important that people know about this 301-move-draw-rule.

quote AcademicNinja: "How often do 300 move rated draws happen? Every 1,000 games?"

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

Well, the 301-move-draw-rule was implemented recently. It is not very well known I suppose.
Without the 301-move-draw-rule, the answer to AcademicNinja is: previously it couldnt happen (there was no end after 301), but in future it will happen more and more often. Why? --> There is an incentive for the losing side to keep playing that long.
Why? Because the losing side "earns" a draw in this case.

And why would the winning side not check mate sooner?
Because he is angered by his opponent that he does not resign.
Plus, some of us have probably experienced this:
The winning side starts the 20 moves-mating process, and just 1 move before check mate the losing side lets his time run out. Especially if he has accumulated some additional incremental game in the 20 previous moves.

The behaviour of the winning side (to not attempt to check mate) might not be correct, but then again - the losing side has all trumps in his hands: he can let his time run out, or he can resign. If one side is allowed to continue to play, so is the other. No double standards, please.

Plus, with this new 301-move-draw rule, the losing side has even realistic chances of a draw in case his opponent plays along and is stupid enough to play 301 moves.

Due to this hope (getting away with a draw) less games will be resigned in the future. It might not happen often now, but it will happen more often in the future. Really, the rule is currently hardly known, but will be known more often soon.

I suggest a better solution. I dont mind the game to end after 301 moves, but it should be declared as a win for the winning side, like it would be declared as a win in a real match, too (when the arbiter and others want to go home and close the building).

If that can not be agreed, then at least there should be a warning like "last 50 moves before draw will be declared".

Until then, I can only recommend to continue playing and not to resign, no matter how terrible lost you are. Some players, especially if they are way stronger than you, take this as an insult, and they will refuse to check mate you, and you get away with a rated draw after move 301 is reached.

(if you have nothing to say, other than insults, or comments about the old thread - please just dont. If you see somebody trolling in this discussion - please dont feed the troll.)

To quote the relevant part of your post: " If you see somebody trolling in this discussion - please dont feed the troll."

Everything else was sufficiently debated here:
lichess.org/forum/lichess-feedback/any-game-longer-than-300-moves-adjudicated-as-a-draw?page=18

nvm

"The behaviour of the winning side (to not attempt to check mate) might not be correct, but then again - the losing side has all trumps in his hands: he can let his time run out, or he can resign. If one side is allowed to continue to play, so is the other. No double standards, please."
The objective of a game of chess is to deliver checkmate, for this reason, an essential skill of a chess player is knowing how to deliver checkmate in a clearly won position.
You usually do not see masters play out their games until checkmate because they all know that their opponent knows how to force mate quickly, so there is little point in demanding a demonstration.
However, a player in a lost position has the right to, by playing on, demand proof of the opponent's ability to force checkmate.
Suppose the winning player actually does not know how to force checkmate, should they be able to win anyway?
Obviously not, thus, the two sides are not equal, the losing side has the right to a demonstration of the winning side's knowledge of how to force checkmate, and the winning side has no right to a win without demonstrating such knowledge.
So if you do know how to force mate, just do so already, and if you don't, practice some endgames to learn this essential skill.

Such is my view on this topic,
Allonautilus.

nvm

The 300 move cap is for technical reasons. It wasn't implemented recently. For reference the longest OTB game throughout history was 269 moves. So this shouldn't be a problem. This discussion has already been discussed in length. There is no point in additional forum posts concerning this.

nvm

A higher skill level does not equal to longer chess games. The reasoning behind the cap is purely technical.

A practical reason to play more than 300 is the folloing:

You play 3+3. You suspect that there is a mate or win, but you have to think how to get it for, say, 3-4 minutes. At the moment, you do *not* have 4 minutes, but you can earn it, if you quickly play 50 drawish moves, then make 1 pawn move, then again play 50 drawish moves.

It is almost practically impossible to reach 300 moves due to the rules of threefold repetition and 50 move rule. This discussion is pointless.