How is this drawn by insufficient material?

I just played a game which was drawn in this position because of insufficient material. I know 2 knights cant force a mate, but couldnt my (white) pawn have reached the other side (i forget what thats called, is it "ranking"?) and become a Queen? Or his king could have moved out of the way and again I could get another queen?

I realize I was totally boned, but why was this drawn?

http://www.chess.com/livechess/game.html?id=129121292

Assuming you ran out of time, your opponent would normally have won on time but it was deemed he had insufficient material to checkmate you. You were given a free half point instead of a loss.

Edit: Emphasizing here that I bolded deemed as it is not truly insufficient material. It is insufficient material for site purposes.

Strangely (for some anyway), whilst K + N + N Vs K cannot force a win, K + N + N Vs K + P can (it takes a very large number of moves). So it's doubly strange that the game ended in the fashion that it did, as both sides can still win.

oh. nevermind then.

There was recent talk of changing the insufficient material rule on the site to keep black in this example from running white out of time for the win. It could have been implemented. That is why I specified deemed not actual insufficient material.

The thing that troubles me with this specific example is that a draw was awarded when all outcomes are still possible. Seems like the game is being dumbed down.

The original poster is White. Not likely to ask for a loss.

In the past it was assumed that Black could win, especially if White helpmated. It appears the site has implemented a deemed insufficient material to stop players from trying to win on time when they have no chance of checkmating if they are "anyone short of a GM or an IM".

Empty vessels make the most noise.

This position shouldn't be drawn. If White runs out of time, it's a loss since Black can win. If Black runs out of time, it's a win for White since in theory White can also win. Objectively speaking, it's a winning position for Black.

Something definitely is wrong here (and I was planning to point that out before I read Natalia doing it :) ). Two knights, even two lone knights, versus King is not insufficient material to mate - two knights can mate, they just can't force mate in the vast majority of positions. Whoever ran out of time should have lost.

If chess.com aims to comply with FIDE chess rules, this must be fixed. If the USCF rules are different in this regard, they are stupid. Especially considering this is even a tablebase win.

My memory is true. (Except I forgot I already read this was implemented.)  http://blog.chess.com/webmaster/live-chess-gets-some-love

 "Automatic draw on time-out if opponent has insufficient mating material: KB, KN or KNN"

Thanks for the information.

Probably because white ran out of time... it's an error because the position could have had pawns in the way of white's king.

The chess.com policy on this position is a compromise between two USCF rules, "insufficient material", and "insufficient losing chances" (similar to FIDE 6.9 and 10.2).  The problem is that "insufficient losing chances" requires arbitration before the flag falls.  Since there is no means of obtaining arbitration on chess.com, positions like this are considered drawn because of "insufficient material" when the flag falls.  It's not perfect, but it is a resonable solution. 

 So if the following position occured white could draw by letting his time run out??? Surely the rule (if needs to be one) should be that KNN vs. K is a draw and all other KNN ending are winning for the knights.

This position is so interesting to me. I knew that checkmate could be delivered with KNN v. KP, but I didn't realize it could be forced from so many positions within 50 moves. I put this in the tablebase and took a look at the optimal moves from both sides, and it was very educational. The basic idea is to win one of the pawns, then use a knight to blockade the other one, use the king and the other knight to force the king into a stalemated position in the corner, and then move the blockading knight and use it to deliver checkmate while the other pawn runs down the board.

I reached this position once (after 1.Nd7), and my opponent let his clock run out 

He got a draw by losing on time instead of the loss he would get if he played on :/

Necroing this thread... doesn't Stockfish analyze these positions in real time? If it can decide there is mate in 2, it should take precedence.

you probably loss on time and 2 knights cant checkmate a king therefore its a draw

Two knights can sometimes checkmate a king by force (not a helpmate). Look at the post by @jposthuma just 2 posts up. Additionally, they didn't "loss[sic] on time" since they drew...