I don't really understand how this is a draw

i was running this guys clock down as he only had like 10 seconds remaining but the game drew. Isn't mate with two knights possible? so why did the game draw?

That’s when there is another piece in play to facilitate the checkmate. The game in question was two knights and king against a lone king. There is no way to force checkmate in that game, therefore a draw is awarded. 

-Jordan

Fun fact. 

Two knights is a draw, but two knights against a pawn can be a win.

It wins because you can lock the enemy king and mate him one move later. The pawn being able to move avoids stalemate. The king maneuver between move 5 and 10 is to reach the same position with the other player to move.

Of course mate in two knights is possible, but

(i) it's pretty much impractical in practice (it cannot be forced)

(ii) if I recall, the site has declared certain combinations of pieces to be a draw; for example, on this site, a lone king and bishop will be a draw against some combinations of pieces even if mate is technically possible

Inaccurate. You can mate with two knights and a king, but it cannot be forced.

On this site, the last I recall is that a king and two bishops (both on the same colour square) against a lone king is a win for the side having the bishops if the side having the lone king flags.

This was as of a few years ago, so I am not certain if this has been rectified.

Show us an example of a mate position and tell us what the last move was that caused the checkmate.  ******I'm pretty sure you can only achieve this position from a stalemate (meaning it's theoretically impossible), hence why you can only do it if the opponent has another piece.*****

• <--- edit: I was wrong, this is false

The point is, it cannot be forced (which is pretty sad for the combination), but it is possible (based on FIDE rules). This site has ruled the position to be a draw, however, because I don't think it's realistic to award a win for the side having two knights.

Ah good point you are right.  I did not think of such position.

If there is an opposing pawn, like jg777chess has noted, it's a different story. I did reach one such endgame, but failed to convert the game as I decided that a win was too hard and I accepted a draw after taking the last pawn.

USCF and Chess.com refuse to adopt the FIDE rules. That's a constant source of annoyance.

It would be interesting to see how a real FIDE-rated tournament handles the issue. It is a bit hard to imagine that white can play the game on, and all the arbiters and stuff patiently wait for 2 more hours after everyone else has gone home, waiting for the 50-move rule to kick in. All the time knowing that the position is dead drawn.

By the way, overstepping the time otb will prove decisive. 

Learning from pain in good ok‘ Germany. US player IM Friedel learned the difference the hard way in a classical otb game - he lost R vs. N. I played in the same tournament.

http://www.uschess.org/content/view/8079/141/

Painful 😁 The arbiter paid attention in class.

I also would have expected a draw, as explained in "100 endgames you must know" by de la Villa.

If you cant force a mate on this site it is a draw.

I mean you cannot force checkmate with King+Harry vs. King in the corner as well - it’s an easy draw. So who in the US is drawing the line?

King + Harry?

Harry, the h-pawn