The 50 move rule shouldn't exist!

What's KNNR?

A typo. Read KNNKR (similarly KNNKB for KNNB, I've just noticed).

2 knights vs rook is an obvious draw. 1 rook+ 1 knight vs 2 knights can be a win in over 260 moves1

There are cases where Black can promote to a rook and win in the same number of moves as he would have by promoting to a queen. He gains no advantage in promoting to a rook but neither does he lose. In most cases he drops a half point.

In the cases where Black is forced to promote into KNNKN the result is always drawn unless White can win in two moves.

Haha, sums it up

The above position is a draw if even if either player lets his time run down to zero. Because there is no legal combination of moves that will lead to checkmate for either one.

But I did understand that u want to emphasize on time saving rather than making pointless moves. The only problem here is that if a player feels that he can win the position may be because his position is technically winning or even if his position is equal but he feels that he can trick his opponent into making mistake, he should be allowed to do so.

Also when the 50 move rule was first introduced, I believe that people didn't know about these forced checkmates taking more than 50 moves.

So to cut short, the options are 1) to have 50 move rule, 2) to have a 75 move rule or 3) to remove the move limit.

I am more of in favor of 1) and 2) for me it doesn't matter if it is 50 or 75. I u think that u can do more justice to chess by making 75 move rule by allowing certain mating combination which were not allowed in 50 move rule, than there will still be other mating combination that won't fit in 75 move rule.

another point to think about is what Neigel Short always tell, the power of stalemate allows the weaker side to escape with a draw. So now similarly the power of 50 move rule should also help the weaker side to escape form certain mating combinations.

A rook can't win against 2 knights. Even 1 knight is supposedly a theoretical draw with best play.

How come no one is saying it should be 100. Just 50 and 75. Why not 100??? Not that it should exist at all, but for everyone that thinks it should, why not 100 moves???

I know in obvious positions like that, where the rook mates next move even if there are 10 knights.

This is a draw, right?

And obviously it's only in cases like that that Black would opt to promote to a rook. 

Why would black promote to a rook in those cases instead of a queen?

That's a draw with either side to move. How would you draw as White to play here?

To bring a bit of excitement into his drab wretched life.

A rook wouldn't be able to force mate against a king except in a couple positions. Promoting to a queen almost always wins vs 2 knights from positions where king is on side of board or knights are connected/far away.

I have never drawn a game due to 50 move rule online or OTB. But the rule shouldn't exist because there are wins that can take well over 50 moves with best play to force mate. I can easily checkmate with knight and bishop from any position. It's really easy. Usually takes me in the 30s to force mate against stockfish. BTW What is your problem?

False, look at the tablebases. Some wins can require anywhere from 78-553+ moves to win WITH BEST PLAY. 2 bishops vs knight endgame can take up to 78 moves to force mate and up to 51 moves before the knight capture. 2 knights vs Pawn can take up to 145 moves, but the pawn probably moves at some point, so I don't know how the 50 move rule would affect that.

But of course you can't get into KNNKRN from KNNKP so your algorithm can safely ignore that fact.

What does that have to do with anything?