Why has chess.com not implemented this rule?!

I’m a bit angry right now because of a loss by timeout in a dead position. It was rook and king vs rook and king and we were just shuffling pieces back and forth. Is it not a fide rule that a player can claim a draw if the position is dead? For example it would be ridiculous to force players to shuffle their bishops around for fifty moves in an opposite color bishop endgame with pawns that can’t promote. My opponent is also a dirtbag for not taking the draw offer. Here is the game: https://www.chess.com/game/live/86103645081

Why you didn't took his a7 rook to force a draw? maybe they haven't put this rule because it would take some kind of feature to tell if the position is dead or not

That's not a dead position. That's a theoretical draw, if you have time to get the draw by agreement, triple repetition of position, 50 moves with no captures or pawn moves, or get an insufficient material to continue type position it would be a draw.

You did it to yourself. 51.b3?? is an imbecile move. Just double up on the 7th rank, trade twice on g7- you win the 2-on-1 on the Queenside, about to be 2-on-0 since his king is out in LA LA Land.

I flagged a lot of guys like this. Rook +king vs roook + king where my opponent has 7 seconds and I have 25sec.

That game was completely your fault. you blundered your rook when you were in a winning position. and you missed several draw opprotunities. and I would'nt take the draw offer in the first place cuz i'm up on time.

In my opinion it brings chess.com into disrepute that people can win in such a way as you describe. It may be that they don't have the programming skills that would need to be available to improve their algorithms.

You're quite right that it makes results on this site a joke. The rule in chess is that a player has to be seen to be attempting to MAKE PROGRESS and no-one can win if they aren't attempting that. This means that there is no question about it and they do not use the correct rules of chess here.

Aside from what I wrote, I think we have to accept that it is what it is. It does make blitz just as big a joke as bullet, of course. You can't determine a player's strength from either. I long since stopped getting annoyed by it and just resign if I'm obviously going to lose on time and can't checkmate my opponent. But it means that the time controls are easy to manipulate and therefore blitz ratings mean as little as bullet and puzzle ratings.

That game wouldn't be a declared a draw under any rules of chess.

For you and everyone else saying this game wouldn’t be declared a draw, here is the USCF Handbook. https://new.uschess.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/us-chess-rule-book-online-only-edition-chp-1-8-24-20.pdf

Page 38 number 14I4 clearly says that rook v rook is a draw if there is no way to force a win and there are no pawns on the board. This is simply a matter of common sense.

I guarantee you that position is not a draw under US Chess rules.

That only exists if the event allows Insufficient Losing Chances claims and requires a tournament director.

However, by default, insufficient losing chances claims are not allowed unless advertisef in advance for an event.

14H. Claim of insufficient losing chances in sudden death.

No claim of insufficient losing chances in sudden death will be allowed.

We don't really care about the rules. We just don't want to lose.

According to FIDE rules you could have claimed a draw:

III.5 If ArLcle III.4 does not apply and the player having the move has less than two minutesle` on his/her clock, he/she may claim a draw before his/her flag falls. He/she shallsummon the arbiter and may stop the chessclock (see ArLcle 6.12.2). He/she may claimon the basis that his/her opponent cannot win by normal means, and/or that his/heropponent has been making no effort to win by normal means:
III.5.1 If the arbiter agrees that the opponent cannot win by normal means, or that theopponent has been making no effort to win the game by normal means, he/sheshall declare the game drawn. Otherwise he/she shall postpone his/her decisionor reject the claim

But chess.com does not follow FIDE rules in its entirity.

It says trying to win the game by normal means. Purposefully flagging in a dead drawn position is not considered "by normal means".

Only if advertised in advance and also requires an arbiter, so not automatic.

III.2.1 The Guidelines below concerning the final period of the game including Quickplay Finishes, shall only be used at an event if their use has been announced beforehand.

and

III.2.2 These Guidelines shall apply only to standard chess and rapid chess games without increment and not to blitz games.

The game in question was blitz under FIDE regulations.

Just do perpetual check.

you can checkmate them still. Just offer a draw or do 3 move repetition if you need to draw or force a stalemate.

It's hard to checkmate with a drawn position. 3 move repetitions are hard to do as opponents may not repeat the same moves. Like what he stated, opponent declined his draw.

Perpetual check would be the best to draw a game.

Thank you, that is exactly the point I was trying to make. I understand that chess.com does not adopt all these rules but I was suggesting that they do because I was a little frustrated with that being a loss. I knew there was a rule something like this in FIDE but I was having trouble finding it.