50-moves rule in 21 century. Should it be set up to the latest knowledge about chess endgames?

Historically 50 moves is set by Ruy Lopez, but althought he was good player, he killed chess with this number. And what about beatiful mates in 51 moves? They are not counting because of just one move more of Ruy Lopez imagination? I'm staunch advocate of X move rule where X means current knowledge from tablebases. Actually longest known mate is in 545 moves so lets make 545 moves rule and don't kill the beauty of chess. On the margin necessary to mention that the Distance To Zeroing in longest mate is around 514 move

The number of places where that happens and where a human can play it unerringly, is likely minuscule. For tournament play, if the mate doesn't exist in 50 moves or you can't find it, move on to the next game

Who care about tablebase. Defense never plays perfectly either. The chin has spoken.

A few decades ago, if I remember correctly, there was a move to modify the rules so as to include 50-move rule exceptions for various special cases. I believe that the idea was so unpopular that it was eventually abandoned. I think Edmar Mednis was one of those who vigorously argued in favor of the simple 50-move rule.