Chess is not beautiful like girls games
Chess is sport?
Sort:
cod3_zombie wrote: The goal, the winner, isn't determined by a physical outcome like all sport require.
What about esports though? That's just people staring at a screen playing video games, right? I haven't been following this thread, but I said it before - it's all marketing. If the popularity of chess or any game gets high enough to make money, it will be called a sport to attract an audience. 'Sport' is really just a term used to sell product. We associate it with some kind of physical effort, but I can see a future where a lot of popular sports are played online.
i just copied a comment earlier to make it longer than it already was
i added "lol longest comment ever"
actual person who said that is a few comments above this
Sep 26, 2023
0
#127
Festerthetester wrote:
I can name a lot of boring activities considered sports. Golf for example. NASCAR. How many times can you watch cars drive around in circles before you change the channel?
Back in the days of A.J. Foyt and Janet Guthrie, my dad and I would watch the Indy 500 every year. So, I think we watched them go around the track 127 times before changing the channel.
Thats true
i like golf. it's fun.
I like soccer
bro this looks like a pizza tower intro (was looking at images and saw this)
and who the hell is timmy failure
I dont know
Is Jenga a sport?
It requires physical skill. It is competitive.
The conversation about it cannot possibly be dumber than the one about chess.
Or can it?
Festerthetester wrote:
Is Jenga a sport?
It requires physical skill. It is competitive.
The conversation about it cannot possibly be dumber than the one about chess.
Or can it?
Any endeavor enough human beings decide is a sport, is a sport. Any endeavor that marketing dweebs decide is a professional sport and back it up with $$$, is a professional sport. Any other definition is transient, and incorrect.
Sorry for skipping to the inevitable and only end of the argument.
mhaysam wrote:
pleas subscribe my channel
Teepu Arts
Reported for spam.
In short, the exclusion of chess because it fails to meet physical criteria is logical, but it rests on assumptions that are culturally grounded. Likewise, the argument that chess is sport is logical, although proceeding from somewhat different assumptions. The debate cannot be resolved conclusively.
Based on the previous discussions, it was concluded chess is not a sport. Pretty much every time this comes up, the same conclusion is reached. Instead of taking just 2 or 3 definitions, or cultural references, it makes more sense to consider ALL of them.
The reasons that chess is not a sport far outweigh the reasons for it being a sport. All the reasons that chess is a sport are flimsy at best (it takes physical effort to move the pieces). So does staring at a wall. That also takes physical effort and burns calories.
But the reasons chess is NOT a sport aren't so easily refuted. Such as running up against the definition of words, the cultural aspects, but most importantly the nature of the game of chess itself. It's purely a mental pursuit.
Unless of course we are talking about bullet chess or something which does take physical skill.
Correction, you reach the same conclusion. You do so by ignoring my arguments and restating your assumption as if it were the logical conclusion. You then proceed to argue against the weakest points on the other side, From these you offer the most ludicrous analogies yet seen in the thread.
.
In this case, I am offering only a glimpse at how serious inquiry might proceed/has proceeded contra the facile approach in post #87.
.
Eventually, I leave the thread because all reasonable discussion has ended.
.
Some of what I quoted in post #89 replicates posts I've made in other similar forums.
Perhaps if you could untangle what you think you are saying with "definition of words, the cultural aspects". You rely on English dictionaries, and only the least comprehensive ones. There are other countries in the world beyond England and the United States. Some of these have been quite clear that chess is a sport.
.
Your "exclusivism" is not the only valid point of view.
You leave the discussion for the same reason everyone does. I'll agree that all reasonable discussion has ended. The result is always the same. Chess is not a sport. That is where the discussion ends because there is nowhere else to go. All the arguments end.
Until someone else brings it up again, and the cycle repeats. The "chess is a sport" people always focus on two or three things that they believe reinforce their view. Usually it's a dictionary definition, the IOC, and the notion that playing chess requires burning calories. But all of these get tossed every time because they don't hold up.
It's best to consider ALL dictionary definitions, not just one. It's best to consider ALL organizations, not just the IOC. It's best to consider ALL things that burn calories, not just chess.
The problem that they always run into is that if chess is a sport, then there is no reason for the word sport. Quite literally everything a human does would would be a sport. The word sport is meant to define certain activities, that separate some things people do from other things people do. For example, chess burns calories, therefore it's a sport, right? That makes staring at a wall a sport because it satisfies all their definitions for sport.
The reasons they use to want chess a sport have all been addressed and shown why they don't make chess a sport. It's not that difficult because there are only a handful of them.
The reasons chess is NOT a sport is a different matter. There are many more reasons, and they mostly go ignored or unaddressed. Why are chess sets in the toys and games sections and not the sporting goods? Why is chess not televised or played at sports bars? Why does the rules of chess allow OTHER people to make the moves in their place? Why can the game of chess be played with no physical representations, like a board, clock, or pieces? Chess can be played entirely in the minds of two people, name a single sport where that is possible. Why do most dictionaries exclude activities like chess when defining the word? Why do most dictionaries use descriptions like "physical skill"?
Other than something like a dream competition, chess is about as opposite of sport as one can get. I say the word dream because dreaming is something done entirely in your mind, even though a person may make physical representations of it, like recalling it or describing it the next day.
Sports are literal, physical activities. As your dictionary describes, they can be pastimes, for fun, in jest or recreation. But they are real, they are actual physical activities. The only physical part of chess is the part two people choose to display, such as pieces on a chess board. But they don't have to. Chess is a simulation, there is nothing that actually happens. No ball was put into a basket, no race car crosses a finish line, no bulltet that pierces a target, etc. The only proof that a chess game even existed is what people choose to record it. Since a chess game is a competition between two minds, and not two bodies, the game itself doesn't require that record. The goal, the winner, isn't determined by a physical outcome like all sport require.
lol longest comment ever