Chess is not an art

Some art is worth nothing. Just like anything else, the value is decided by the buyer. There are some people who believe chess is a sport, which means they think chess can be anything. Anything can be a sport. Just as anything can be art. So as long as there are people who think chess is a sport, and the definition is decided on an individual basis, then chess would have to also be art.

Chess is a sport

Like poetry. Only I'm sure we can all agree poetry is a much more physically demanding sport than chess. The TV sponsors of both chess and poetry are paying those athletes billions to keep the masses entertained. It's a huge market.

I think Poets are not athletes. As far as i know Poets work ith their mind, its way more subjective, If we look at the definition of sport, it could fit chess, not poetry "physical exertion or skill, competition, and a defined set of rules"

you're right.

it's not an art, it is art.

Chess is both (in my newb opinion) just as life is both. If you see a *Position Group and it does not quicken your heart in its symmetry, elegance, balance and mental buzz then you might wish to find another hobby.

*forgive my naming something of which I still have little understanding. I refer to all board objects (pawns, pieces etc) which are required for the pattern to take our breath away.

@LieutenantFrankColumbo "A picture of a banana taped to a wall sold for over $8 Million.."

no - say it ain't so! hahahah! We live in Idiocracy!!

Chess is an art and I am the artist 😀

Chess isn't all logic and reasoning without creative input. To some extent, chess is pure science since playing it well is possible by using evidence from games played by others. It's also a cognitive skill which puts together memorisation and the ability to calculate but it's very important not to ignore the creative side, which occurs when we use patterns to point us in the right direction in the moves we make. I can understand why some people emphasise the artistic side to chess.

The reasons you give for why you think people may think chess is an art aren't very good evidence, since you talk about "crazy ideas", which is obviously a representation produced by your insistence that chess doesn't have an artistic side to it. Reason 2 is also flawed, in a similar sort of way. If you give a reason for why an assessment may disagree with your own, it's important not to include your criticisms as part of it. For instance, in a stream of logically rational calculation, one mistake can also cause failure. So the same criticism can and does apply to the idea of pure calculation.

I think it may help some people to play when they think of chess as a piece of music or whatever. Whatever floats your boat and puts you in the mindset to achieve good results.

I don't understand. Poetry was an Olympic sport, chess never has been. You can't claim chess could be a sport and leave out poetry, a sport that has a history of Olympic competition. Poetry, because of it's physical demands, the skill, the competition is probably a slightly more demanding sport than chess. Both of these elite sports command prime time TV coverage and sponsorship dollars.

There are no defined rules in Poetry. Ima go through some you might name "Language", nope, is not a rule. "Grammar" also no need to follow this rule, because of slang, and poetry, at least in german, has barely ever followed grammatical rules. If you have any more for me to disprove, please do tell

That's of course subjective. It's not for anyone else to decide for you what that means. The sport of poetry, as competed in during the Olympic games, followed all the necessary rules to elevate the sport to that elite level. The sport of chess on the other hand has never reached that pinnacle.

If we get to arbitrarily decide what a sport may, or may not be, then the same rules apply to art. If you believe chess is an art (or sport, or banana, or inner tube) then nobody has the right to tell you any differently. Right?

all players are artists lol

except some are unoriginal...

metaphors lol

bro wanted a laugh mayhap bro?

I'll elaborate my opinion here:

Art is not a well defined field. Everything can be considered art, It is so subjective that It is almost entirely dependant on your angle of approach.

From a logical perspective, there is no logical reason to counterpose logic-related(objetive) vs art-related(subjective). They are 2 different angles of approach and not necessarily contradicting or opposed to each other(but could be). From a logical perspective everything is logic related and built. The art itself is a logical thing. Logically speaking its an expected combination of errors or any kind or deviation of a standarized perspective, taking a scientific reference point. I allow myself making the assumption that any kind of deviation is expected in any complex system that is evolving. "Art" could just be considered a fancy word for It, giving value to certain kind of deviation that may trigger emotions (dopamine release) in a part of a brain and marketing It like a subjective beauty, with a meaning..and calling It 'art'

From a completely artístic point of view(which is imposible, because everything including the words and language form of expression is logically designed so its just not possible to separate logic from art bc art itself is described by logic with logic-made tools in a world sustained by logic ): art is kind of chaos (and chaos is another fancy word in the definition of entropy(a scientific term)) .I definetely could be wrong, so this description is art. I am art. Everything is art

C'mon, chess is art. At least in the hands of Carlsen, Kasparov, Fischer, Capablanca, Tal, Judith, to name a few.

Is it not art a beautiful combination or a sacrifice?

Nah, this is nonsense.

VERY WELL SAID!!!!!

Video games are a art.