Bug: draw without threefold repetition

TL;DR: the server called a game a draw even though there was no threefold repetition.

Game: lichess.org/ucWemAH9

I recently played a game where my opponent refused to resign despite losing spectacularly. To force him to resign I created 5 queens, which gave me an advantage of +50 (including a rook). Still my opponent didn't resign. So i restricted his king to two squares and premoved a victory dance with my king to humiliate my opponent and force him to resign. Obviously i created a pattern with my king moves that made sure that there was no threefold repetition. My plan was to checkmate him at move 100 to turn it into a piece of art even if he wouldn't resign. However, the game was called a draw by the server even though there was no repetition whatsoever in the game! Could this decision be reversed please?

There was indeed threefold repetition - Moves 55, 69 and 83 by white where the position was the same.

Edit: didn't see #2

@amos_chesstra said in #1:

TL;DR: the server called a game a draw even though there was no threefold repetition.

Game:

I recently played a game where my opponent refused to resign despite losing spectacularly. To force him to resign I created 5 queens, which gave me an advantage of +50 (including a rook). Still my opponent didn't resign. So i restricted his king to two squares and premoved a victory dance with my king to humiliate my opponent and force him to resign. Obviously i created a pattern with my king moves that made sure that there was no threefold repetition. My plan was to checkmate him at move 100 to turn it into a piece of art even if he wouldn't resign. However, the game was called a draw by the server even though there was no repetition whatsoever in the game! Could this decision be reversed please?
i mean, what joy does it give you to promote to 5 queens and not checkmate him. IMO this is what you deserve and this is quite hilarious.

It's a draw, because if it wasn't it would be infinite.

this is just funny

Let this be a lesson, just fricking go for the win immediately.

@Haymarket said in #2:

Positions after white's move 55., 69., and 83. are the same. Three times the same position = draw.

Seriously?? Even if the moves are 30 moves apart it counts as a repetition?? That's madness... Well, I guess I learned something new today

@Fiyah said in #7:

Let this be a lesson, just fricking go for the win immediately.

You know, my opponent was losing so badly that mating him immediately wouldn't even feel that amazing...
At least I learned something new this way

Contrary to the belief of many people, threefold repetition does not mean that the position was repeated three times in consecutive moves. In this game, for example, the position on move 55, 69, and 83 is the same and even though the position was not repeated after consecutive moves, it is still considered a draw by threefold repetition.

I have always wondered where this misconception started. My theory is that it is a result of top players repeating moves to get a draw a beginners understanding that as the moves themselves must be repeated rather than the position. If anyone knows the true origins of this myth, please tell me.