Sorry, but I won't take the bait of counting moves in the video - apparently nobody did and the game isn't in databases.
But as you wrote at the start of the previous post "There were many interesting games in the event, and I hope some of you will mention them in the comments." (which I had somehow overlooked): There was a remarkable game Kosteniuk-Koneru from the penultimate round of the women blitz event (which you didn't voer and I don't blame or criticize you at all). 219 moves, let's just say this much:
Rook, bishop and knight for most of the game - moves 25-193 - then knight and bishop vs. king converted by Kosteniuk. Kosteniuk had missed some earlier wins, Koneru could have claimed a draw based on the 50 move rule on move 133 but "prolonged the game". Claiming is of course risky without a score sheet - if you're wrong the opponent gets an extra minute aand only you are down to increments. On the Internet, the server claims it for you.
"Sorry, but I won't [count the moves}"...deeply disappointing.
I had noticed the Kosteniuk-Koneru game, as they went to the game in the live broadcast. I was surpised that Koneru played it out, as even those who are only casually familiar with Kosteniuk know that she has always been a diligent, hard-working student of the game; add to that her training in the old Soviet School of Chess, and there's really no chance she would fail to convert her advantage. That said, she's a former women's world champion trying to do it in blitz. As you no doubt remember, but many more recent readers may be unaware, another, then-current women's world champion, was unable to deliver the mate in a *classical* game. Pretty embarrassing (video here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFF5ibgB6eA&t=435s), see also the press conference at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzAHQp20-gY&t=1s).
I'm not sure if I disagree with your statement that "[c]laiming [a draw] is of course risky without a score sheet". It's "risky" in the sense that there is a risk involved - the opponent gets a time bonus in case of an incorrect claim, and some additional time to come up with a winning plan or at least a fresh way to cause some problems. But if you mean to suggest that this bit of risk means that the decision to make a claim is wrong or even on the borderline, then I totally disagree, at least in the Kosteniuk-Koneru case. Black is going to suffer forever in that ending, with no real prospects of anything (positive) other than a draw by the 50-move rule. Make the claim, and if it's denied one at least knows how many more moves there are to reach the safe haven.
With "risky" I did mean "risk involved" - as explained by (chronologically) me and you. I didn't mean to imply, and didn't think that it could be interpreted as not worthwhile trying, let alone improper or even (borderline) unethical behavior. Actually something similar (but with "no risk involved") happened at the end of Maghsoodloo-Carlsen, also covered in the live broadcast (but maybe this was too early morning in your time zone). After 86.Na8+ Kb7 Maghsoodloo stopped the clock, but didn't yet resign - instead trying to claim a draw based on the 50-move rule, then resigning immediately after the claim was turned down. It had been relatively close, 39 moves, some people in the chess24 chat accused Maghsoodloo of "trying a last dirty trick" while it had been a legitimate try.
Maybe Koneru was also hoping to reach 75 moves when arbiters have to interfere. There were several cases at the previous (2022) world rapid/blitz in Almaty, for the weirdest one see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDHMA5e37k0 (chief arbiter explaining everything from 15:33 onward). Ghaem Maghami - Khusenkhojaev on board 52, white trying to win rook and bishop vs. rook. After 73 moves, black claimed a threefold repetition - this claim was wrong but he could have claimed a draw based on another rule .... . The clock was restarted, the game resumed and black resigned three moves later (before getting mated), the last moves weren't picked up by the live transmission. This result (1-0) stood, pairings for the next round were done, and then a deputy arbiter was alert - pointing out that 75 moves had been reached when the game is definitely drawn, whatever happens afterwards is irrelevant. The result was changed to 1/2, but pairings for the next round couldn't be changed. Ghaem then had another rook and bishop vs. rook endgame against IM Madaminov where arbiters topped him after exactly 75 moves, while Nakamura could play rook and knight vs. rook against Harikrishna for 83 moves. For further stories, google "75 move rule chess world rapid".
As to why Koneru played it out rather than resigning: it was a long game towards the end of a long event, maybe it was just inertia. In any case, this game was relevant for the top standings, she had nothing to lose and even a 1% chance to survive is a chance.
Sorry, but I won't take the bait of counting moves in the video - apparently nobody did and the game isn't in databases.
But as you wrote at the start of the previous post "There were many interesting games in the event, and I hope some of you will mention them in the comments." (which I had somehow overlooked): There was a remarkable game Kosteniuk-Koneru from the penultimate round of the women blitz event (which you didn't voer and I don't blame or criticize you at all). 219 moves, let's just say this much:
Rook, bishop and knight for most of the game - moves 25-193 - then knight and bishop vs. king converted by Kosteniuk. Kosteniuk had missed some earlier wins, Koneru could have claimed a draw based on the 50 move rule on move 133 but "prolonged the game". Claiming is of course risky without a score sheet - if you're wrong the opponent gets an extra minute aand only you are down to increments. On the Internet, the server claims it for you.
"Sorry, but I won't [count the moves}"...deeply disappointing.
I had noticed the Kosteniuk-Koneru game, as they went to the game in the live broadcast. I was surpised that Koneru played it out, as even those who are only casually familiar with Kosteniuk know that she has always been a diligent, hard-working student of the game; add to that her training in the old Soviet School of Chess, and there's really no chance she would fail to convert her advantage. That said, she's a former women's world champion trying to do it in blitz. As you no doubt remember, but many more recent readers may be unaware, another, then-current women's world champion, was unable to deliver the mate in a *classical* game. Pretty embarrassing (video here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFF5ibgB6eA&t=435s), see also the press conference at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzAHQp20-gY&t=1s).
I'm not sure if I disagree with your statement that "[c]laiming [a draw] is of course risky without a score sheet". It's "risky" in the sense that there is a risk involved - the opponent gets a time bonus in case of an incorrect claim, and some additional time to come up with a winning plan or at least a fresh way to cause some problems. But if you mean to suggest that this bit of risk means that the decision to make a claim is wrong or even on the borderline, then I totally disagree, at least in the Kosteniuk-Koneru case. Black is going to suffer forever in that ending, with no real prospects of anything (positive) other than a draw by the 50-move rule. Make the claim, and if it's denied one at least knows how many more moves there are to reach the safe haven.
With "risky" I did mean "risk involved" - as explained by (chronologically) me and you. I didn't mean to imply, and didn't think that it could be interpreted as not worthwhile trying, let alone improper or even (borderline) unethical behavior. Actually something similar (but with "no risk involved") happened at the end of Maghsoodloo-Carlsen, also covered in the live broadcast (but maybe this was too early morning in your time zone). After 86.Na8+ Kb7 Maghsoodloo stopped the clock, but didn't yet resign - instead trying to claim a draw based on the 50-move rule, then resigning immediately after the claim was turned down. It had been relatively close, 39 moves, some people in the chess24 chat accused Maghsoodloo of "trying a last dirty trick" while it had been a legitimate try.
Maybe Koneru was also hoping to reach 75 moves when arbiters have to interfere. There were several cases at the previous (2022) world rapid/blitz in Almaty, for the weirdest one see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDHMA5e37k0 (chief arbiter explaining everything from 15:33 onward). Ghaem Maghami - Khusenkhojaev on board 52, white trying to win rook and bishop vs. rook. After 73 moves, black claimed a threefold repetition - this claim was wrong but he could have claimed a draw based on another rule .... . The clock was restarted, the game resumed and black resigned three moves later (before getting mated), the last moves weren't picked up by the live transmission. This result (1-0) stood, pairings for the next round were done, and then a deputy arbiter was alert - pointing out that 75 moves had been reached when the game is definitely drawn, whatever happens afterwards is irrelevant. The result was changed to 1/2, but pairings for the next round couldn't be changed. Ghaem then had another rook and bishop vs. rook endgame against IM Madaminov where arbiters topped him after exactly 75 moves, while Nakamura could play rook and knight vs. rook against Harikrishna for 83 moves. For further stories, google "75 move rule chess world rapid".
As to why Koneru played it out rather than resigning: it was a long game towards the end of a long event, maybe it was just inertia. In any case, this game was relevant for the top standings, she had nothing to lose and even a 1% chance to survive is a chance.