Incorrectly declared draw on timeout

#20 That's an amusing possibility, but my concern is that the defender could sit forever since his flag has already fallen.

@Toadofsky:

In the proposed idea, the defender has no part in it.

The point is to demonstrate a legal sequence of moves that end in mate; that's all on the guy with the time left.

He has to demonstrate that sequence; the defender has no hand in it at all.

heh, just created en.lichess.org/forum/lichess-feedback/avoiding-checkmate-thanks-to-badly-implemented-chess-rules-d-2 and find out this post :D ....

BTW there would prolly be more problems around this rules such as position like (only pieces on board would be those I would write)

White: Ke1
Black: Ka8, Qe2

white to play lost on time (0-1) while it should be 1/2-1/2

Another situation would be situation such as

white: Ke1, b4, d4, f4, h4
Black: Ke8, b5, d5, f5, h5
white/black lost on time (0-1/1-0) while it should be (1/2-1/2)

and there would be many other cases where you would have to prove the result

Hmm... KNN cannot force checkmate as well, but KNN-K is win, not draw!

en.lichess.org/hNDuILepo5Pb

Dear developers, where is logic ?!!

@KM2200 The logic is defined by FIDE. "If a position arises in which neither player could possibly give checkmate by a series of legal moves, the game is a draw. "

"By a series of legal moves" is the key here. Doesn't have to be forced.

Dear @Assios, did you read the first post?

#24 I see your example and I'll reply soon.

In my opinion K+NN should be handled the same way as K+B versus K+P. (My preference would be to use FIDE rules.)