Chess is a Sport.

After conducting months of research I have irrefutably concluded that Chess, a board game, a strategy game, a competition, an art, along with other names used to describe this beautiful game is also a Sport.

According to the Cambridge English dictionary, one of the most reputable publishers in our time the definition of a sport is: a game, competition, or activity needing physical effort and skill that is played or done according to rules, for enjoyment and/or as a job.

Following this definition it is undisputed that Chess is all of those except the arguably most important definition to what is, and is not a sport; that is an activity needing physical effort.

In the study "The stress of chess players as a model to study the effects
of psychological stimuli on physiological responses: an example
of substrate oxidation and heart rate variability in man" published in December 2008 by the European Journal of Applied Phycology, an experiment was conducted on 20 males to see the cardiovascular implications of playing chess, and it noticed an increase of blood pressure, heart rate and the rate of respiration.

This is precisely what an activity needing physical effort entails. In conclusion, yes Chess is a sport alongside being a fun board game, strategy game, competition, and a form of art. Chess should be viewed as a sport and professional chess players should be viewed as athlete's in their own regard.

If a game of darts is virtually accepted as being a sport then why not chess? The International Olympic Committee as well as over 100 countries recognize chess as a sport so why shouldn't we? In addition to this many Chess athlete's earn millions from practising their sport - Grandmaster Magnus Carlsen one of the most pronounced chess athlete's in the whole world has earned approximately 9 million euros off prize funds let alone money from sponsorship deals.

I hope this post radically changes your perspective on chess and feel free to share!

Tóg go bog é

I asked the question of why the ‘yes’ camp thinks it’s so vital that chess be considered a sport.
(But then this one crazy-pants showed up and started talking about ‘Revenge of the Nerds’ being a cultural turning point… The whole thing was a mess.)

Anyway, here’s the key: All of the elevated levels of respiration, etc that occur in chess competitions are STRESS-related, not EXERTION-related.

I’m a strength and conditioning coach - we work with all kinds of athletes - and other than “stay generally healthy and try to reduce stress”, I simply cannot create a program for a competitive chess player. (Well, other than proper posture when sitting.)

We define sport as physical (skill and exertion-based) competition.
I adore chess, but it’s simply isn’t a sport.
AND THERE’S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT!!! 🤷‍♂️

If I'm not wrong, what I'm getting from your reply is that you believe that the increased heart rate, respiration, blood pressure etc.. is not from exertion but rather from stress.

But I argue that in a game of chess exertion and stress and intertwined, as you are a beginner I have doubts in your ability to calculate lines, and ponder about a position as greatly as a a professional chess player that regularily goes to tournaments like Magnus or Fabiano and therefore your appreciation of the intensity of mental exertion in a heated chess game may be impared significantly.

Burning 1.67kcal per minute while playing chess over a 1 hour and 30 minutes is no worse than sports like archery which burns atleast 1.6kcal per minute. Chess fits the defintion of a sport perfectly and the elevated rates of respiration are casued by stress and exertion.

Fun Fact: Chess Athlete's experience heightened levels of adrenaline from playing chess from the times of stress and anger that the game causes. This improves the mental concentration of it's athlete's to play the sport better!

I also don't understand the need to consider chess as a sport at all costs ( as if this added a "nobility" to chess that it absolutely doesn't need because it already has it ).

When we talk about physical effort in sport, it is clear that we are not referring to the generic physical stress that accompanies an activity as a consequence of commitment, but to the muscular effort necessary to perform that given activity. To shoot with a bow requires a muscular effort to draw the bow; to play tennis requires a muscular effort to use the racket and move on the court; and so on. To move the pieces on a chessboard no effort is made ( a paralyzed person can very well play chess, for example by voice command ). A sport need a physical skill to perform the activity that characterizes that sport. Chess is played exclusively with neurons, not with muscles. That professionals play chess with a sporting approach, also training physically to withstand the fatigue of long games, this is true, but it does not make chess a sport, because it lacks precisely the essential caracteristic that distiinguishes a sport from any other type of competitioin. IMO.

Chess is certainly a sport if you use VERY heavily weighted pieces.

25 kg Rooks, that sort of thing.

Then play Blitz!

Increased heart rate, respiration, blood pressure, etc. are not what make something a sport. That is not in any definition. All those things could happen by avoiding a car accident, figuring out how to keep your job, or being on the witness stand at a trial.

As you've already defined, a sport requires physical skill. Which chess requires none. Zero. The one thing that is the most important also happens to be the one thing chess completely lacks. Chess is a mental competition, not a physical one. Which is why the rules of chess accommodate people with no physical ability to play the game. People who are unable to move the pieces or write down the moves or hit the clock are not prevented from playing competitive or recreational chess.

It's also probably worth considering that some people simply don't stress out about chess, or any competition. Everyone is different. If two people are playing the same game of chess, and one is completely stressed out, with increased blood pressure, heart rate etc is that person participating in a sport? While the other person could care less. The other person plays casually and calmly, enjoying the recreational aspect while quietly winning. No increased blood pressure, no stress, no worries, no additional calories burned above just sitting there. Does it seem reasonable that during this game one person is playing a sport while the other is not?

Because if that does seem reasonable, then literally anything and everything is a sport. Which means the definition of sport should probably be changed to "sport: noun, of or pertaining to everything"

Why does this dumb subject need 10 different topics? 9 wasn't enough?

“I argue that in a game of chess exertion and stress and intertwined” No. They’re not. There’s no physical exertion.

This is why the discussion is always futile.
To the ‘yes’ camp, it’s an ideology - and you can’t argue with ideologues.

You want chess to be a sport, listen to blueemu. Kettlebell / farmer’s walk chess. That would UNDOUBTEDLY be a sport.

And here’s the bottom line science that no one will care about anyway: While levels elevated through exertion are generally good for you, levels elevated through stress are generally not 🤷‍♂️

Chess is amazing in SO MANY WAYS!!!
I dare someone to find a more cognitively challenging game or (in my opinion) fun.
But come to a sports science/medicine center. That drunk guy playing darts in bar? We literally have more for him than we do for you.
Outside of general fitness and posture when sitting, we actually have *nothing* for you.

Love the game for what it *is*. Don’t demand that it be something it’s not, or fill a role that it. quite. simply. can’t.

I always try to promote health and fitness. Help people live longer, stronger, happier lives. This website, because of THIS useless, ongoing conversation, is where I fail.

So I’m out. It’s too nice a day for futility.

So then is checkers, parcheesi, and poker

You simply cannot argue that a game of dart-throwing classifies more of a sport than a game of chess.

In an average game of chess the players make an average of 40 moves - 40 pieces lifted off a square and placed onto another. In a game of darts according to their official rules you are limited to but 3 darts to be thrown.

I am not discrediting darts in any regard I think it is a fun way to spend your time but it is evident that both sports Chess and Darts require skill, precision, mental prowess, and technique to achieve victory. It is important to note that the amount of exertion is not nessecarily a reason why a sport shouldn't be a sport as evident in darts.

Robert Sapolsky a neuroendocrinology researcher from Standford University reported that in a single day in a chess tournament based setting that he could burn a whopping 6000-7000 calories compared to darts mere 85 calories a day.

Your point that "The drunk guy playing darts in a bar" has more credibility as being an athlete than an active chess grandmaster at a tournament is completely bogus.

In conclusion, the average chess player in a competitive setting moving their pieces 40+ times on average has more physical exertion than a dart-thrower throwing 3 darts in total.

Merriam-Webster:

Sport: (noun) physical activity engaged in for pleasure: a particular activity (such as an athletic game) so engaged in.

Oxford English Dictionary (OED):

Sport: (noun) an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment.

Collins English Dictionary:

Sport: (noun) any activity or experience that gives enjoyment or recreation; pastime; diversion.

are these enough opinions for you?

Chess is not, and should never be considered to be a sport.

If stress and increased heart rate is all that is needed for something to be considered to be a sport, then doing a math test would be considered a sport.

Except the burning of calories is no measure of something being a sport or not. It's the physical skill required, not how much of it. Darts are considered sport not because of how many calories are burned, but because of how they are burned. It's the physical skill of throwing the dart that matters, not how physically exerting it is. Chess requires no physical skill, even though it could burn more calories through stress.

It's why other activities, like bowling, pool, archery, or shooting sports are all sports, even though they burn few calories. While things like college entrance exams, tax audits, and sitting in traffic are not sports, even though they burn more calories.

It is recognized by the Internation Olympic Committee as a sport who are you to say that it shouldn't even be considered as a sport.

Moving a piece in chess is also apart of the game... what's your point here

By considering chess as a sport, now every single board game could also be considered one. Is playing candyland, chutes and ladders, or monopoly a sport? I think the answer is obvious.

Moving a piece in chess is not required to play the game. Chess is a mental competition, not a physical one. So no physical skill of any kind is required. Some people play the game with no pieces, not clock, and no writing of moves.

People with physical disabilities that prevent them from moving pieces are still perfectly capable (and allowed) to play both recreational and competitive chess.

Did you even read what you are replying to? The most authoritative figure of what is and what is not a sport, recognizes chess as a sport. This is aimed at many.

I don't think I ever insinuated that the Cambridge English Dictionary defined chess as a sport, and if it is opinion only then what is or is not a sport, this is why we have organizations like the International Olympic Committee to give an authoritative view of what sports should be classed as such.

Being prestigious does not equate to being correct. Also could point out that you are yet to acknowledge any of my points.