What is a sport?
- Thread starter Neilds
- Start date
GB72
Money List Winner
Purely mental, I'd say not. It is a game, but for me not a sport. Of course, there will be people that see any game as a sport I suppose. So, Chess, Scrabble, Monopoly, etc could all be considered sports by some. I'd say Twister is more of a sport than those
There is some old case law about darts and I think it helps in the definition in that it was ruled a sport because there was a majority of skill and not much left to chance which is why I would bring chess above other board games.
jim8flog
Journeyman Pro
They used but too many spectators got stamped on.
Hacked
New member
When I did A Level Sport Studies many, many years ago we did a module called the analysis and classification of sports. It looked at 3 major things that an activity required to be considered a sport.
1 it is competitive- there is a winner, a loser and a means of differentiating between the 2.
2 it involves physical activity. The degree of this is almost certainly the most challenging aspect of the process.
3 it is an institution- this means a degree of development of the activity, structures, rulings, recognition by the masses etc. possibly a tough one to call as to when an activity becomes a sport, particularly in terms of recognition. You could look this one up but as an example I’d think there will be a relatively recent recognition as a sport for the likes of pickleball, footgolf or wiffleball.
1 it is competitive- there is a winner, a loser and a means of differentiating between the 2.
2 it involves physical activity. The degree of this is almost certainly the most challenging aspect of the process.
3 it is an institution- this means a degree of development of the activity, structures, rulings, recognition by the masses etc. possibly a tough one to call as to when an activity becomes a sport, particularly in terms of recognition. You could look this one up but as an example I’d think there will be a relatively recent recognition as a sport for the likes of pickleball, footgolf or wiffleball.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Besides…the Red Button will be giving a huge variety of options to watch.
HomerJSimpson
Hall of Famer
I had to google wiffleball. Never heard of it.
Steve Wilkes
Well-known member
I think the Amateur and Professional argument about a sports inclusion is outdated. It should be if the Olympic version of that sport is the pinnacle for the competitors.
For me it's, if you ask the question to the top competitors in a sport, "Would you rather win the Olympics or XYZ Cup/Tournament", if they answer XYZ, then to me that sport is not needed in the Olympics
ie Football (Champions League or Olympic), Golf (The Masters or Olympic) & Tennis (Wimbledon or Olympic), these should not be in the Olympics
Boxing is a difficult one, but because it's been a traditional Olympic sport in it's short form, and only open to Boxers who haven't progressed to the longer/professional version, it is still the pinnacle for these boxers.
For me it's, if you ask the question to the top competitors in a sport, "Would you rather win the Olympics or XYZ Cup/Tournament", if they answer XYZ, then to me that sport is not needed in the Olympics
ie Football (Champions League or Olympic), Golf (The Masters or Olympic) & Tennis (Wimbledon or Olympic), these should not be in the Olympics
Boxing is a difficult one, but because it's been a traditional Olympic sport in it's short form, and only open to Boxers who haven't progressed to the longer/professional version, it is still the pinnacle for these boxers.
Does it matter? Do we need an argument about my sport is bigger than your sport? If someone wants to call darts, or even dominoes, a sport, hey crack on if it makes you feel better.
Do marathon runners look down their noses at someone who runs 100m in 9.8 seconds? For me, it’s a non-argument.
Do marathon runners look down their noses at someone who runs 100m in 9.8 seconds? For me, it’s a non-argument.
Neilds
Assistant Pro
Not sure where you have got the idea that this an argument, I think it is one of the better discussions we have had recently on the forum - and not just because I started the thread
GB72
Money List Winner
It is interesting and I do like this debate. I think the big comparison with me would be people who are against the idea of breakdancing but, in many ways, it has a similar skill set and set up to floor exercises in gymnastics and few have an issue with that.
Arthur Wedge
Well-known member
Not sure where you have got the idea that this an argument, I think it is one of the better discussions we have had recently on the forum - and not just because I started the thread
Think it’s a good debate and been well natured as well
Swango1980
Well-known member
Who brought this up as an argument?
GB72
Money List Winner
I do think that some of the selection criteria needs to be tightened up, you could streamline the games by just ensuring that everyone is at least competitive. I am not just picking on smaller nations etc but would use as an example Andy Murray in the tennis, yes a former gold medalist, yes the sentimental choice to let him take part but I am not sure that there is an indication that he warrants his place on being able to challenge for the title (Happy to eat my words, I really like him).
Swango1980
Well-known member
What does it matter whether certain sports have massive and bigger prizes to be won outside of the Olympics? Or, why does the Olympics have to be the pinnacle prize in that sport? What if it is almost 50/50 whether an Olympic Prize or another prize is the biggest trophy in that sport? What would happen if Athletics or Gymnastics somehow developed a competition outside the Olympics that really took off, creating a huge fan base, and became the No. 1 prize to win in that sport? Would you then scrap Athletics or Gymnastics off the Olympics?
Surely all that matters is that the Sport's governing body wishes to be part of the Olympics, and the IOC accept it as a suitable sport? If the sports governing body feel that their athletes and fans have no interest in the Olympics, and they have bigger prizes to contend for, then they can always opt out of the Olympics. I don't think anyone is forcing them to be there? I'm pretty sure footballers, golfers and tennis players have some pride in representing their country in the Olympics, and certainly have a sense of pride if they win a medal.
Arthur Wedge
Well-known member
Agree - for me the Olympics is the pinnacle of multi sports events - some stand alone sports don’t need the Olympics - tennis etc have their standalone major events - slams , majors etc and they are above any Olympics medal
Not sure where you have got the idea that this an argument, I think it is one of the better discussions we have had recently on the forum - and not just because I started the thread
If I wasn’t as bald as a cootI’d give you a hair to split
GB72
Money List Winner
I guess my counter argument would be that there is not room for every sport and do there has to be a selection process and I would focus at least part of that on whether an Olympic medal would be the highest echelon in that sport or, if not and has been done with other sports, introduce age or other restrictions on the field. On the example of Golf, I actually think it would be a far more interesting if the entrants were from the amateur ranks as, at the moment, it is just like any other tour even. Now amateurs will not bring money into the Olympics but it would be a great experience for those involved and it would also probably be the pinnacle of their career in the amateur ranks.
Swango1980
Well-known member
My counter arguments:
1. Is there not room for every sport? Technically, as they are all played on different surfaces by different athletes, I'm sure there is room for many many sports. I suppose the more you have, the more you'd have overlapping in the schedules, and maybe you dilute the attendance at each event. But, there are already a very high number of sports involved, and I guess these are the sorts of things that the IOC would consider anyway. For example, if they had no choice but to choose between Athletics or Football, no doubt they'd go for Athletics all day long.
2. I'm pretty sure it is a great experience for professionals as well, given that they to are human beings with emotions
. As a fan supporting my nation, I'd also rather see professionals, as I want to see the best of the best. I know in some sports you simply will not get the best professionals playing, like football. But, still better to have young up and coming pros, than selecting a group of amateurs (not sure how far down the pyramid you'd need to go to find your top amateur footballers?)
Steve Wilkes
Well-known member
You are right 1980, It doesn't matter and what the IOC wants is all that matters. This was just my opinion and what I would like to happen and how I rate certain sports in the Olympics, I don't mind wall climbing, moguls, rhythmic gymnastics etc.. as most of the competitors train and give it the all to peak every 4 years in the hope of being crowned Olympic Champion. I know it might just be me, but I have no interest in who wins the football, I'm not sure if we even enter, but If GB won the gold would the manager be held in esteem like Sir Alf or Sir Alex
chico
Club Champion
A couple of my friends say golf isn't a sport, I don't argue. Most people will have differing views and ultimately was does it matter. One of the subjects some people can argue about till the end of time without a definitive answer.
Similar threads
