For these type of definitions you have to get into defining what “athletic” means. I prefer to think of a sport as being something that requires a physical skill and is inherently competitive. “Inherently” because anything can be made competitive by seeing who can do the most/fastest, e.g. competitive basket weaving.
And the result should be measurable.
Ice dancing is not inherently competitive, nor is the result objectively measurable. So by my criteria, it is not a sport. Curling is, because it is inherently competitive (who can get the closest) and measurable.
If it requires the participant to wear make-up, it is not a sport. (e.g. sync swimming)
If it requires the participant to wear costumes, it is not a sport. (e.g. ballroom dance)
If points are awarded for style and presentation, it is not a sport. (e.g. figure skating)
If it requires no significant physical effort or level of fitness, it is not a sport. (e.g. curling)
Those things listed are what I’d call competitive events, rather than sports. But it doesn’t mean that I necessarily think anything less of the achievements of those competing.
ETA: I’m taking your first two criteria as a bit tongue-in-cheek, and the second two more seriously.
So football is not a sport since players have to wear costumes?
I’m not sure makeup is required for sync swimming, just common practice.
I’m not sure why they still have style points in ski jumping - they could easily go just by distance ( not sure how often a person with a shorter jump wins due to style points)
“Any (theoretically) friendly contest, objectively scored, which, at its highest levels of competition, demands high levels of physical conditioning in order to be competitive.”
Yeah, the definition of “sport” can mean any activity played for fun, but that’s not really how we use the word here in America. And, because this is America and we get dumb about stuff like this, we’ve also turned it into a value judgement. That’s why fans of NASCAR and ballroom dancing and chess get defensive when people say that those things aren’t “sports.”
To me, it’s not a value judgement. Just a delineation between different types of activities. It has nothing to do with skill or talent; only with the nature of the competition.
At least attempted objectivity, at any rate. Boxing and wrestling, for example, are scored by judges who are attempting objectivity, even though their interpretations of what’s happening may differ.
Agreed. None of the mentioned events interest me in the least but I would not try to claim that they are not achievements or don’t require skill or talent.
I think 48 is way beyond any other sports’ oldest champion. When an NBA or NHL player is close to 40, they are usually a novelty and not near the top of their sport, let alone a champion. Team sports also lets you hide somewhat behind your teammates. While I don’t doubt that some athleticism is necessary for almost any physical activity, there’s a line to sports that I believe is drawn between what’s simply beneficial and what’s absolutely necessary. Being athletic helps in anything, that’s why in competitive events, many of the best are usually in good shape. I don’t doubt that Tiger Woods is athletic and has suffered injuries due to his intense game workouts, but he’s been beaten by the likes of muffin top Vijay Singh and man boobs Mickelson.
As for tennis, I’d be more convinced if the older people play against Nadal and Federer. Hell, even Federer’s losing it. He’s not winning nearly all his games like he was before, the last 2 years he’s pretty much at winning only ever other time, which for most people is good but for him is bad.
Agreed. Like most things there’s no clear dividing line between “sport” and “game”. Any game can become a sport and any sport can be played as a game.
The difference comes down to intent. If you can walk away from a competition or exercise without any consequence coming from winning or losing, then it’s a game.
To me, the most jaw-dropping and beautiful Olympic event ever was the pairs ice dancing of Torvill and Dean in Sarajevo. That certainly took athletic ability. They received perfect scores from all of the judges.
The most screaming and excitement that I experienced was the famous hockey game between the USA and the USSR when we were compared to high school hockey players up against the best professional hockey players in the world. We won and went on to win the Gold Medal.
Why shouldn’t both of these be considered sports? I don’t think “rough and tumble” is in the definition.
It’s interesting to look at the oldest winners in various sports. Here’s a few (in some cases, I could only find the oldest participant in the championship game/series, not necessarily the winner).
Baseball World Series: 46
Superbowl: 2 days shy of 41
Stanley Cup: 47
World Cup final: 40
Olympic Track & Field Gold medal: 42
NBA winner: 43
A 48-year old golf champion doesn’t look too far removed. However, I would agree that in general golfers can play later because it i less physically demanding. Golfers tend to fade after 40 whereas in most of the others 30 is usually on the downward slope.
I find it curious that probably 99.5% of elite curlers are in good shape, if fitness isn’t a requirement of curling. That seems like a truly impossible random event.
People who follow Revtim’s way of thinking might say: Not with a strict interpretation of your second condition. How would ice dancing be any different if it weren’t between two or more competitors?
I defer to George Carlin as the expert on what is and is not a sport.
[QUOTE=George Carlin]
To my way of thinking there are really only three sports: baseball, basketball, and football. Everything else is either a game or an activity.
[/QUOTE]
There’s no competition. What would you stand to win?
I realize that here I am, obviously, distinguishing “A sport” from a different sense of the word “sport” as it’s used in the sense of “general athletic endeavour.” When I go out for a run tomorrow, some would say I am engaging in “sport,” which is fine. I would say, however, that my going out running is not A sport. If I were running in a race, then it would be A sport.
George Carlin is a comedian, so bear in mind, what he said was a joke.
If you are an elite player in an activity, and you are fat and out of shape, does not disqualify that activity from being “a sport”.
I now several fit and ripped people who are absolute klutzes and cannot do the most basic skills in mainstream sports.
I know a guy that runs several marathons per year. But despite being a popular kid in growing up, he cannot throw a football. He cannot dribble a basketball or even make a layup. He cannot catch a baseball. He is just a total klutz. But he can run and run long distances.
SKILL is an important part of an activity being a SPORT. Golf is a sport. Curling is a sport. It does take skillfulness to master these sports.
Personally I don’t like sports that require judges to determine a winner. Gymnastics, Sync Swimming, Diving, Figure Skating, Ice Dancing, and yes, even Amateur Boxing. But they are still sports. It take skill to perform them on a elite level
