Chess is sport?

I don't see why it wouldn't be.

If it's still played like it used to be the participant has to remove blocks, one at a time, until the whole tower falls over. That definitely takes skill. The actual participant has to physically remove the actual piece, and not just say he wants to do it.

In chess, the participant doesn't have to physically participate. He can have someone else do it, and the desired result is exactly as he wishes. I'm pretty sure in Jenga a participant can't tell someone else to remove a piece and have the result be exactly as he wishes.

A very small minority of people will say chess is a sport. It would be interesting to compare chess players take on it compared with the general population. My guess is with chess players about 70% will say it's not a sport, with the general population, probably about 95% will say it's not a sport.

I've been to a few sports bars, and never once have I ever seen a game of chess televised.

Is hocky is a sport

The term "sport" typically refers to physical activities or games that involve skill, competition, and physical exertion. It is often organized and governed by specific rules and regulations. The origin of sport can be traced back to ancient civilizations, where various forms of athletic competitions were practiced for entertainment, exercise, and cultural or religious purposes. The root of the word "sport" is derived from the Old French word "desport," meaning "leisure" or "pleasure.”

The classification of chess as a sport is a topic of debate. While some people consider chess a sport due to its competitive nature, mental skill requirement, and organized tournaments, others argue that it lacks the physical exertion typically associated with traditional sports. Different organizations and countries have different views on this matter. For instance, the International Olympic Committee recognizes chess as a sport, while some countries do not officially classify it as such. Ultimately, whether chess is considered a sport may depend on individual perspectives and the context in which it is being discussed.

There are a few common arguments made for considering chess not a sport:

1. Lack of physical exertion: Unlike traditional sports that typically involve physical fitness and athleticism, chess is primarily a mental activity. Some argue that physical exertion is a defining factor for something to be classified as a sport.

2. Absence of subjective judging: In most sports, referees or judges play a role in determining the outcome based on subjective evaluations. In chess, the outcome is solely based on the players' moves and strategies, without subjective interpretation or judging.

3. Limited element of chance: Unlike many sports that involve an element of chance or unpredictability, such as team dynamics, weather conditions, or random factors, chess is considered to have little to no element of chance. It is seen as purely a mental battle between opponents.

4. Not physically competitive: Sports are often defined by physical competition and direct confrontation. In chess, players do not physically compete against each other, but rather engage in a mental battle of strategy, analysis, and decision-making.

It's important to note that these arguments are not definitive and the classification of chess as a sport can vary depending on different perspectives and definitions.

There are several arguments in favor of considering chess a sport:

1. Intellectual competition: Chess requires a high level of mental skill, strategic thinking, concentration, and problem-solving abilities. Some argue that the mental competition in chess is comparable to the physical competition in traditional sports.

2. Organized tournaments and competitions: Chess is played in organized tournaments and competitions at local, national, and international levels. Just like traditional sports, chess tournaments have regulations, rankings, and prizes, indicating a level of organization and competitiveness similar to other sports.

3. Physical aspects: While chess is primarily a mental activity, some argue that it does involve physical elements such as hand-eye coordination and fine motor skills involved in moving the chess pieces on the board.

4. Recognition by official bodies: Chess is recognized as a sport by various official bodies, including the International Olympic Committee, which granted chess official recognition as a sport in 1999.

5. Physical fitness and training: Although physical fitness is not a primary requirement for chess, some players and trainers argue that maintaining physical fitness and stamina can contribute to improved mental performance and endurance during long matches and tournaments.

Ultimately, whether chess is considered a sport may depend on individual perspectives, definitions, and cultural or organizational contexts.

"AND KASPAROV SCORES!!!"

Solmustafa

Those are good comments, and they are all true. I would give your views on it an A-.

But you left out probably the most important factor. Both your for and against left out the participation aspect. Even if we completely eliminate the physical exertion, physical skill, burning calories, etc part we still have the issue of physical participation. Actually doing the activity itself. .

All of your in favor arguments can and do apply to other activities which are probably not considered sports. Taking a college entrance exam for example. Or litigation. They are organized, have specific rules, recognized by certain bodies, etc. Physical fitness of course helps in any human activity so that argument could be applied to the staring at a wall example. That's not to say litigation or taking a test or even staring at a wall isn't a sport, it certainly could be under the right circumstances. But I think the general consensus is that those would not be sports.

But chess is an activity that does not require actual physical participation. Someone else can make the moves for you at your direction, and the result will be the same as if you did it yourself. Really no different than effectively giving executive orders. You don't have to carry out the task yourself if someone else does it exactly as you dictate.

I would like to ask for an example of a sport where that is allowed or done.

The concept of mind sports certainly embraces moot court, a competitive activity for law students. High school and college debate is similar.

I agree. I suppose certain other games, like checkers, could be mind sports too. Since they are mental competitions, not physical ones.

It just seems odd to call a mental competition, like crossword solving or tax preparation a sport.

It seems to me that for something to be a sport, you would have to actually do it yourself. And not be allowed to give direction to someone else and have the result be exactly the same as if you did it yourself.

Maybe I'll redefine the word for todays dictionaries to include the words "physically participate." since physical skill and/or physical exertion are too vague.

Solemustafa--that's a good starting point. Perhaps in sports, physical capabilities are the primary determinate of outcomes in a plurality of considerations.

I dont think you guys will put masseges like this

Yes

Whatever side you’re on, you should enjoy this cartoon from Facebook.

Chess is not solved.

There are long threads on the topic on this site. Go to one of those and present your evidence. You are spamming this thread with an unproven assertion.

Welcome back, BTW.

You made the assertion that it had been solved. The burden of proof falls on you.

Chess is a sport. Not all sports require physical exercise.

That's true, not all sports require physical exercise. Sports like archery, shooting, darts, or billiards have very little exercise. But they are sports.

But all sports require physical participation. They all require that you actually perform the task the sport requires, like running, jumping, shooting, throwing, etc. Can you name a sport that allows you to direct someone else to perform the physical part of the sport, but you still get the credit for the result?

For example, in basketball can you tell someone else to throw the ball in the basket and if they do, you get the credit for making the shot? Or soccer, can you sit on the sideline, tell someone else to kick the ball into the goal, and if they do, you get the credit for making the score, not them.

So far nobody has come up with an example, so you could be the first.

Why can't a sport be solved? Just because something is solvable doesn't mean everyone can do it. Maybe I'm not understanding your position very well.

In bowling, wouldn't "solving" it be a perfect score of 300? Wouldn't it be impossible to have a result better than that? Or a shooting sport, wouldn't solving it be a perfect bullseye? I would imagine solutions would only apply to some sports, but it seems possible at least.

sport of if not this we not be i thing.

It's always 2am somewhere.