This is based on a thread in GD asking id cheerleading is a sport?

-Does a sport require some sort of athleticism? If so, we can dump a couple of Olympic sports like air-rifle and curling. Poker, darts, billiards and spelling bee all out.

-Does a sport require objective scoring, timing or measurement? If so, gymnastics, diving, figure skating and maybe even boxing are out. (IMHO, boxing stays because of the KO angle allowing for decisive wins).

-Does a sport require a skill? If so, a good argument could be made against weight-lifting or even many track events.

1- Needs offense and defense. No defense = Not a sport. (sorry cheerleading, sorry bowling)
2- Both sides need to be doing going against each other at the same time. (head to head)
3- Objective scoring (sorry gymnastics)
4- Needs to have some sort of physical activity (so no connect 4 would not be a sport)

So NO, Boxing as a competition, and Nascar and track and field as either races or competitions, would NOT be sports by my definition.

No defense

Not to mention in running are they REALLY going head to head. Competing against each other? Having an impact on the others performance?

I have to include that before yo say add obstacles and then it becomes a sport, because that would be defense.

There was a woman who ran the fastest time in the San Francisco Marathon, but was not declared the winner because she did not register as an elite runner. The elite runners were not aware of her pace and could not make adjustments.

>The elite runners were not aware of her pace and could not make adjustments.

So you only run your hardest / fastest if you are aware of someone else?
That's stupid!

And here's my personal favorite part:
>There was a woman who ran the fastest time in the San Francisco Marathon, but was not declared the winner because she did not register as an elite runner.

So her time didn't count because she was not an elite runner.
If we extend this theory to other "sports" then Shane Battier's shots shouldn't count..NOT ELITE.
wtf is that?

If what you're saying is she didn't register sat all that's different.

Again though this is just what my people and I decided over a drink or two.
Bar talk at its finest.

Back in the day boxing matches would just on until somebody won. They instituted a set number of rounds and judging to keep people from dying.

An objective outcome can be reached without judges, they judges are just a shortcut for safety.

1- Needs offense and defense. No defense = Not a sport. (sorry cheerleading, sorry bowling)
2- Both sides need to be doing going against each other at the same time. (head to head)
3- Objective scoring (sorry gymnastics)
4- Needs to have some sort of physical activity (so no connect 4 would not be a sport)

Golf violates rules 1 and 2.

Cuz I have to say, it is a really great live event.

I guess if I say Golf ain't a sport, then a tournament based around something that ain't a sport, could not be a sporting event.

it's a competition with a rigidly defined ruleset which allows a winner and a loser to be declared based on the predetermined rules of the game.

it's why things like cheerleading or ice skating or gymnastics or diving are weird because winners are determined via "judging," which creates an objective factor in the competition, which generally creates for a poor game. it would be like calculating style points into a person's "score" at the end of a game of chess based on how they played instead of just saying one person won, one person lost.

anything with an objective factor like this is generally understood as something different than your typical game.

That's how I'd define it

If you try to get too picky in rules you start to rule out things that are obviously sports.

Does this leave room for agument for things like Cheerleading? Yes, but that's just how it works. You wont find a clear simple definition that rules out the things that should be and includes all that should be included.

Are they doing athletic things to beat each other? Then sport

Gymnasts have incredible athleticism but the fact that a panel of judges determines who the winner is makes gymnsatics more art than a sport to me.

Same with cheerleaders... or figure skaters.

Otherwise, I like your definition.

Or just things that mostly involve women?

Or just things that mostly involve women?

Olympic boxing scores punches landed. Subject to human error? Yes, but not subjective. And then there's the KO as a means of determining the winner.

In pro boxing is far more subjective, but doesn't factor in artistry as a key judging component.

Like how does calling cheerleading or bowling a sport negatively effect anyone, anywhere? Are they getting some sort of monetary gain by doing so?? I never got the hullabaloo over this.

its fine with me.

Some sort of organization with rules that defines winners and losers. Chess tourneys are a sport, but playing a game of chess with a friend is not. This means cheerleading itself isn't a sport, but cheerleading tourneys make the act of "cheerleading" a sport.

Or kids racing down the block. If they did it once or twice, then it's a race. If they did it every friday with progressive heats and a clear winner, then it becomes sport.

Some people can do something difficult to do that they've dedicated their whole lives to master in order to win in competition...

... yet it's somehow necessary to try to knock it down a few pegs by attempting to define "what a sport is"?

It's weird. And a little sad.

competition to the realm of sport. Eating a lot of food and dancing may be difficult and require years of training, but they are not sports. And if so, is everything a sport? Words should mean things. We already have a word for competitions; it's "competition". No need to cheapen sport.

There's no question that the best competitive eaters use training, strategy, years of hard work, including I would imagine hard work in the weight room to prepare for matches.

I'm not in a position to determine whether it's a sport or not.

If it's just the local boozehounds at Buffalo Wild Wings casually throwing up a hand saying they can eat more wings than their chubby buddy, that's a competition. If you're dedicating your life to that act?

I don't know. I'm just not in the position to deny that label, in any way.

Like, that's literally what a definition is. No one person gets to set definitions. Usage changes and linguists document those changes. The point of this post is to determine how we as a community would define sport. No one really expects consensus. We couldn't get half of these people to agree that the sun is shining. It's just a discussion topic.

What does the label of a "sport" gain that it loses if competitive eating is defined as a sport?

Does it ruin the entertainment value of the sports you like to know that someone else considers something you don't like a sport?

Competition: Some sort of event with clear winners and losers.
Example: Two kids running down the block, competing for the best time.

Sport: Some sort of organization surrounding a competition.
Example: Same two kids running down the same block, but they do this every Friday and keep tabs on who has won the most Fridays.

It's not my deal to determine what's "worthwhile" or not to the eye of the beholder, but yes, beauty pageants are sport (in my personal definition).

For the record, I'm not trying to convince anyone that my definition of sport is the only acceptable definition (although I think that some definitions out there are way too narrow, I do acknowledge that mine is rather broad). With regards to your comment, I was just trying to highlight the difference between 'competition' and 'sport'.

I just feel that excluding activities like Chess and Cheerleading from "sport" is a bit too narrow for my tastes. Regardless of whether or not someone has a personal interest in said activity, other people obviously have a lot of interest in it... and "downgrading" their organized competition based on subjective parameters is a bit unfair.

I was just showing the inherent flaws in your particular definition pf sport as any competition with a sanctioning body, because literally ANYTHING can be a sport, from barbecue cook-offs to beauty pageants.

If a bunch of hardcore barbecuers want to get together and figure out who's the best barbecuer year in and year out, and call it a sport, why not? Why deny them that ability to call their own passion a sport if it's properly organized, has rules and clear winners and losers?

Random, but I decided to google competitive barbecuing... the internet has everything haha

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=rovell/050909

Which means cheer leading is a sport, competitive eating is a sport, gymnastics is a sport, strong man is a sport.... but Miss America is not.

However. I don't know a lot about Miss America.

I personally keep my definition broad because I firmly insist that Chess (and other contests that stress mental prowess) is a sport.

But I have no issues if people want to add physicality to their definition.

Because I can understand people who say either chess or poker competitively are sports.

It's a tough call.

Dudes who just want to make sure everyone knows they are manly because they only consider things they want to as sports.

Bowling is for pussies, I played football in high school like a real man!

>Bowling is for pussies, I played football in high school like
>a real man!

Right, yet if you are actually good at bowling you can do it for years and make money while the high school superstar can tell stories from the good ole days and bore everyone around him.

The question was asked; if you think the question is useless...ignore the question.

Because on most Ceej's response would have been, this question is gay, you're a f*g

Followed by something racist for good measure.

I guess thanks for the heads up.

That board's equivalent of you would have said something like that rather than asking your question.

My point was if you think OKP is the only place where people will make a negative comment about your original post then you have not explored the internet.

I got what you were sayin now tho

Like you were daring to question him on a message board which is unheard of

I wasn't mad about this post at all, it's not like ima start a seperate post with my question.

Shoulda saved that reply for a Thursday

in this argument.

But it's what separates a good jumpshooter from a great one in basketball... or distinguishes an accurate passer from an average one in the NFL.

Just because bowling, darts, golf, and car racing depend almost SOLELY on dexterity and coordination doesn't disqualify them as sports. There are other sports that are solely about speed or strength.

But a motherfucker that can hit a tiny target 20-30 feet away with precision and accuracy is just as much an athlete as Usain Bolt or Kendrick Perkins.