Answers.Body: <p>The 75 move rule was introduced in the <a href="https://handbook.fide.com/chapter/E012014" rel="noreferrer">2014</a> version of the Laws of Chess. The <a href="https://handbook.fide.com/chapter/E01pre2014" rel="noreferrer">previous</a> version of the rules has no mention of it. Since this game is from 2007, it obviously wouldn't have used a 2014 version of the rules.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2023-05-05T03:13:54.610Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2023-05-05T03:13:54.610Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: D M
Body: <p>Game is available <a href="https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1536839" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here</a>. The last 116 moves of that game was R+B vs. R, which is a theoretical draw that is hard for a human to defend. Fressinet eventually faltered and resigned when he was about to be mated.</p>
  <p>Wikipedia gives <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_records_in_chess#Longest_game" rel="nofollow noreferrer">this description</a> of the game:</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>The last 116 moves were a rook and bishop versus rook ending, as in Nikolić – Arsović. Fressinet could have claimed a draw under the fifty-move rule, but did not do so since neither player was keeping count, it being a rapid chess game. Earlier in the tournament, Korchnoi had successfully invoked the rule to claim a draw against Fressinet; the arbiters overruled Fressinet's argument that Korchnoi could not do so without keeping score. Fressinet, apparently wanting to be consistent, did not try to claim a draw against Kosteniuk in the same situation.</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>However: given that 116 moves is well over the 75 moves required for an arbiter to intervene, why didn't this game end in a draw?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2023-05-05T17:29:05.497Z
Comments.Text: I find the quoted text confusing: since Fessinet's argument about the lack of a score was overruled, allowing Korchnoi to claim a draw, why wouldn't consistency imply that Fessinet should be able to claim a draw under similar circumstances?  Such a claim would not undermine Fessinet's claim that the first game should have been a draw, but rather serve to undo the wrong imposed by the earlier decision.
Comments.UserDisplayName: supercat
Tags: <endgame><history><draw><75-move-rule>
Title: Why didn't Laurent Fressinet-Alexandra Kosteniuk (2007) end in a draw?
ThreadText: # Why didn't Laurent Fressinet-Alexandra Kosteniuk (2007) end in a draw?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2023-05-05)
  
  Game is available [here](https://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1536839). The last 116 moves of that game was R+B vs. R, which is a theoretical draw that is hard for a human to defend. Fressinet eventually faltered and resigned when he was about to be mated.
  
  Wikipedia gives [this description](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_records_in_chess#Longest_game) of the game:
  
  > The last 116 moves were a rook and bishop versus rook ending, as in Nikolić – Arsović. Fressinet could have claimed a draw under the fifty-move rule, but did not do so since neither player was keeping count, it being a rapid chess game. Earlier in the tournament, Korchnoi had successfully invoked the rule to claim a draw against Fressinet; the arbiters overruled Fressinet's argument that Korchnoi could not do so without keeping score. Fressinet, apparently wanting to be consistent, did not try to claim a draw against Kosteniuk in the same situation.
  
  However: given that 116 moves is well over the 75 moves required for an arbiter to intervene, why didn't this game end in a draw?
  
  **Tags:** endgame, history, draw, 75-move-rule
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: I find the quoted text confusing: since Fessinet's argument about the lack of a score was overruled, allowing Korchnoi to claim a draw, why wouldn't consistency imply that Fessinet should be able to claim a draw under similar circumstances?  Such a claim would not undermine Fessinet's claim that the first game should have been a draw, but rather serve to undo the wrong imposed by the earlier decision.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2023-05-05. Score: 8 | Accepted answer
  
  The 75 move rule was introduced in the [2014](https://handbook.fide.com/chapter/E012014) version of the Laws of Chess. The [previous](https://handbook.fide.com/chapter/E01pre2014) version of the rules has no mention of it. Since this game is from 2007, it obviously wouldn't have used a 2014 version of the rules.
  
  
  ---
  
  