Chess IS a sport

Evil_Homer

I'm sorry in advance as I know this topic will peeve a lot of people!

From the chess is not a sport thread I believe enough evidence exists to support chess as a sport, full stop!

Even if you believe it is not, there is not sufficient tangible evidence to support your case, so please.......

dwaxe

It's still a debate about the definition of sport...

But don't worry, I'm on the side that believes chess is a sport.

Charlie91

This topic is immortal--for the nth time--chess IS a sport!  Of course it's also a game!

If some scientists in the future can make robots that can really play football, can it be called a sport even if robots play it?  There are obvious variants of different sports. Wink

Rael

Gosh, as loathe as I am to agree with cheater_1 against fellows like Evil_Homer and dwaxe... I was thinking this morning...

Can Deep Blue play chess?

If you answered yes, just follow that down to it's logical implication...

A computer can be an athlete?

eternal21

Rael wrote:

Gosh, as loathe as I am to agree with cheater_1 against fellows like Evil_Homer and dwaxe... I was thinking this morning...

Can Deep Blue play chess?

If you answered yes, just follow that down to it's logical implication...

A computer can be an athlete?


While I agree that chess is a game and not a sport (just like poker, or roulette isn't a sport), your argument is not valid.  Technically you could build a running robot - and 100m sprint would still remain a sport.

phishcake5

I've been an athlete for most of my life and I just gotta say I've as much respect and admiration of pro chess players (if not more) as I do for my other sporting heroes.

Hydrocannon

Theres another forum called Chess is NOT a sport!!! which tears down your idea, Support your forum! DONT let IT get to YOU!!!!!

Rael

No, you miss the point. Back up a second. Let's follow it through.

Did Deep Blue play chess? If chess is a sport, then you're saying that a computer (just the unmoving, housed computer chips) played sports. That's all.

This by no means implies that if you made a running robot it would mean that the 100m sprint is no longer a sport. It would mean you've made a machine which approximates a human activity. Even in that example I wouldn't say that the robot is an "athlete".

Hydrocannon

Rael wrote:

No, you miss the point. Back up a second. Let's follow it through.

Did Deep Blue play chess? If chess is a sport, then you're saying that a computer (just the unmoving, housed computer chips) played sports. That's all.

This by no means implies that if you made a running robot it would mean that the 100m sprint is no longer a sport. It would mean you've made a machine which approximates a human activity. Even in that example I wouldn't say that the robot is an "athlete".


 Well, you say that those who say chess is a sport they mean a robot has played a sport,Exactly. Robots have Played CHESS!a SPORT!

Rael

Fair enough, Hydrocannon. I just wanted to point out that it is one of the implications of the chess is a sport argument.

Chess_Lobster

You chess is a sport people never actually answer the question. If chess is a sport than is there any competion or game thats NOT a sport. For example, Battleships is a sport right, same with Scarbble? If you say chess is a sport, you really can't say they are not, and if you say they are sports, you've really stretcehd the word sport beyond any meaningful definition.

So by that logic chess can be 'called' a sport, but calling it that is really meanigless

exiledcanuck

I'm tired, but this arguement comes down to semantics.  It all comes down to what your defitition of is is.

 

I think the real question is this - is chess any less of a noble/good/quality/gainful/whatever activity as popular sports like football/soccer/gridiron/basketball/baseketball/whatever?

 

Whether or not it is a sport doesn't really matter provided you don't consider it as any less important/skillful/challenging as a sport.

natrix

Chess is a board game. Physcial training for improving tournament endurance includes sport, but until the pieces are thrown at targets, chess is a board game.

Can't believe i'm posting this... LOL

TheGrobe

How about Poker?  Checkers?  Go?  Tiddlywinks?  Rock-Paper-Scissors?  World of Warcraft?

It's a slippery slope.

TiagoDevesa

STOP POSTING IDIOTIC THREADS FOLLOWED BY IDIOTIC ARGUMENTS!

(Unless your thread name is one of the following: "Chess.com secrets" \ "The best thread ever" \ "The most annoying thread ever"

THat's all, good night

phishcake5

Are we really comparing chess with other board games?  There is a reason its called the royal game...so royal it got promoted to a sport.  Sorry if the other board games didn't make the cut, I don't make the rules.

Jippo

DeepBlue plays chess. Ok, then we can say that we have a sport apparatus for training or even a new competition condition.

What is a sport? Sport is a victimless competition of humans (as a replacement of war, remember 1972 in chess) with the main target - honor of the winner. Hystorically sport had athletic disciplines first. Today when we understand the native meaning of sport we can see that chess is also a sport but not an athletics.

Rael

Haha this is so hilarious.

I love that it's come to the point of absurdity whereby we're all honestly embarrassed to still be a part of the argument.

Sigh. Let's try and come up with a way out of this.

Thinking... thinking...

exiledcanuck

In my opinion (this word always makes me think of onion pie) it all comes down to being able to have something that isn't a sport be an equal to a sport.  Which is completely possible.  For example if you were to say that mind games and sports are two mutually exclusive yet equal activites I think you would kill most of this arguement.  People only get annoyed because of the "just" arguements that follow threads like this. 

My justification for this argument is this - take any sport and tell fans of it that their sport is not a sport but just a game.  They may end up argueing with you logically based on semantics but their desire to argue with you is most definetly not a semantic one.  (even though the arguement is).

 

Confused?

phishcake5

exiledcanuck wrote:

 

Confused?


 Not even a little bit.  Although that could change quicker than greased lightning.