I play golf, swim, and hike, which are athletic. So I am a chess player who is also an athlete.
when's your next hiking tournament? 😆
There are several hiking tournaments in Oregon, but I've never participated in one. I've never participated in a swimming tournament either. I'm not sure what that has to do with being an athlete. Someone can be an athlete and still participate in other things that are not athletic.
Yes kinda right. For example Magnus carlsen.
He like football, badminton etc. But he is playing chess too.
dont forget poker
I don't consider poker a sport because it has elements of luck.
All sports contain elements of luck. The ball can hit the corner of the goal post and rebound for a goal kick, or the referee can wrongly think it was a corner. There's a myriad of ways that luck plays a very real part in all sports. Including even the sport of buying stamps in philatelic auctions, which really drains the calories and can burn you out. Not to mention loading the boxes in your car.
Of all the reasons chess is not a sport, this is probably one of the main ones ALL sports contain elements of luck, no exceptions. But chess doesn't contain the kind of luck (or any luck really) that sports have. There is no bouncing ball, no gust of wind, no playing field imperfections, etc.
The reasons people give for luck in chess don't seem to apply much to computers playing each other. But most of the elements of luck in sports would apply just as equally whether it's two humans playing or two robots playing.
And I would have to agree, buying stamps would have to be more of a sport than chess.
It can be really exciting. I haven't been to a live auction for three years and online ones aren't the same. But especially buying large boxes of stamps either blind or semi-blind is a sport exactly equivalent to treasure hunting, because it contains such a strong element of luck.
Obviously, panning for gold is a sport, because it involves considerable exertion, you get your feet wet and the luck element is astronomical. Therefore a sport, since I think we're agreed that everything with a strong luck element is a sport, if you get your feet wet. The exertion is a bonus.
the primary characteristic of a 'sport' is an element of competition:
this thread isn't about luck vs. skill lol.
the primary characteristic of a 'sport' is an element of competition:
this thread isn't about luck vs. skill lol.
In view of the fact that everyone seems to be at liberty to define whatever we want as sports, for whatever reasons we can imagine, IfPatriotGames and I, being old friends, have a tacit agreement that anything is a sport where there's a lot of luck and you can get your feet wet.
the primary characteristic of a 'sport' is an element of competition:
this thread isn't about luck vs. skill lol.
That does make auctions sports, because there's a very strongly competitive element. Provided you get your feet wet.
Even though Chess is a sport, chess players are not athletes. To be athletes, we must spent time on the field and exercise our bodies.
the primary characteristic of a 'sport' is an element of competition:
this thread isn't about luck vs. skill lol.
very good observation.
good observation, he says while being the one to point out in the first place that poker is not a sport because it contains elements of luck
boi
the primary characteristic of a 'sport' is an element of competition:
this thread isn't about luck vs. skill lol.
very good observation.
good observation, he says while being the one to point out in the first place that poker is not a sport because it contains elements of luck
boi
exactly. what is it you are not understanding?
There are many things that make a sport. Being a competition is also one of them, which tactical precision rightly pointed out.
Couldn't you have written: "Being a competition is also one of them, which tactical precision wrongly pointed out"?
It would make it more interesting and also introduce, as a philosophical exercise, the chance to suggest ways in which such a sentence could be correct and could make good sense. Simple first year philosophy stuff so @darkunorthodox88 couldn't manage it but others might.
btw “tactical precision” just pointing that out 
the primary characteristic of a 'sport' is an element of competition:
this thread isn't about luck vs. skill lol.
It’s not about chess as a sport, either. It is, but that doesn’t make chess players athletes.
the primary characteristic of a 'sport' is an element of competition:
this thread isn't about luck vs. skill lol.
It’s not about chess as a sport, either. It is, but that doesn’t make chess players athletes.
No, I can now prove chess isn't a sport. In all sports, you have to be able to get your feet wet and there has to be luck involved. In chess, you don't normally get your feet wet. Therefore it can never be considered a sport.
the primary characteristic of a 'sport' is an element of competition:
this thread isn't about luck vs. skill lol.
It’s not about chess as a sport, either. It is, but that doesn’t make chess players athletes.
No, I can now prove chess isn't a sport. In all sports, you have to be able to get your feet wet and there has to be luck involved. In chess, you don't normally get your feet wet. Therefore it can never be considered a sport.
I think we’ve shown there is luck in chess.
As for the wet feet, I offer two images: Larry Evans and Bobby Fischer playing chess on a floating chess board in a swimming pool, and the rainstorm in Searching for Bobby Fischer.
There was also about a cup of water spilled at the Washington State Elementary Chess Championship last Saturday. One kid running across the mess almost lost an eye (a key sports criterion in another thread) as I waited for the custodian whom I sought and found to arrive with a towel.
who thinks what what now?
luck definitely does not exist in chess
the primary characteristic of a 'sport' is an element of competition:
this thread isn't about luck vs. skill lol.
It’s not about chess as a sport, either. It is, but that doesn’t make chess players athletes.
No, I can now prove chess isn't a sport. In all sports, you have to be able to get your feet wet and there has to be luck involved. In chess, you don't normally get your feet wet. Therefore it can never be considered a sport.
I think we’ve shown there is luck in chess.
As for the wet feet, I offer two images: Larry Evans and Bobby Fischer playing chess on a floating chess board in a swimming pool, and the rainstorm in Searching for Bobby Fischer.
There was also about a cup of water spilled at the Washington State Elementary Chess Championship last Saturday. One kid running across the mess almost lost an eye (a key sports criterion in another thread) as I waited for the custodian whom I sought and found to arrive with a towel.
You have shown no such thing lmao. And again, if there was luck in chess it would not be considered a sport. But lets add this to the list of reasons why you desperately try to prove there is luck in chess. So now besides you thinking low rated players only win by luck, that society doesn't play chess cause its hard too understand, that skill is based on accuracy, that speed chess is not real chess compared to classical, and whatever else I forgot....You also feel chess players are not athletes.
I don't know what your dusty and outdated oxford dictionary is telling you. But again, an athlete is simply someone who competes in sports. Exercised skill, whether with both the mind and body, or in the physical or digital realm, is exercised skill.
But lets face it, you will never admit this because that would be admitting that speed chess is more sporting then classical chess, because exercised skill is more of a factor.
I played 110 bullet games yesterday and today. The absence of skill by all but three of my opponents and me was the dominant factor.
Yes and no
Chess players are athletes in the same way that zebras are horses. They're not.
Say what you want, I couldn't give a toss anymore.
Yes kinda right. For example Magnus carlsen.
He like football, badminton etc. But he is playing chess too.
dont forget poker
I don't consider poker a sport because it has elements of luck.
All sports contain elements of luck. The ball can hit the corner of the goal post and rebound for a goal kick, or the referee can wrongly think it was a corner. There's a myriad of ways that luck plays a very real part in all sports. Including even the sport of buying stamps in philatelic auctions, which really drains the calories and can burn you out. Not to mention loading the boxes in your car.
Of all the reasons chess is not a sport, this is probably one of the main ones ALL sports contain elements of luck, no exceptions. But chess doesn't contain the kind of luck (or any luck really) that sports have. There is no bouncing ball, no gust of wind, no playing field imperfections, etc.
The reasons people give for luck in chess don't seem to apply much to computers playing each other. But most of the elements of luck in sports would apply just as equally whether it's two humans playing or two robots playing.
And I would have to agree, buying stamps would have to be more of a sport than chess.