Chess isn't a sport

"As society has evolved, many now view sports as having a broader definition, but it is important to acknowledge that many others still believe that physical exertion and athleticism are essential components of what defines a sport. This view emphasizes the health benefits and the unique challenges associated with physical competition. And many organizations like the Council of Europe define sports as forms of physical activity aimed at improving fitness, well-being, social relationships, or achieving competitive results. This highlights the continued importance of the physical aspect in any formal definition of 'sport'."

-Wikipedia

I think because chess is so very difficult, so challenging, so impossible to master, some people have the urge to elevate it to the level of sport. Because sports are ALSO very difficult and challenging.

But what makes sports so difficult is the physical skill component. It's the ability to train the muscles and/or have the natural ability to move those muscles in a specific way to get the desired result. Chess is not like that at all. Chess is a mental pursuit, not a physical one. Sports are mentally demanding too, but on top of that require the physical skill component. Chess is almost the anti sport, where little to NO physical skill is required.

There is a reason why when an argument is thought to only be about the meaning of words, it isn't considered important: "It's just semantics".

Chess doesn't change whether we call it a sport or not.

That's very true and probably explains the passion behind arguments for calling it a sport. If you disagree, they think you're saying it's just another game, that it doesn't "deserve" to be called a sport. But I don't hear anyone saying that. And I don't say that.

I think people who argue about chess being sport or not, are just people who are not really enjoying chess. It is chess. You play it because you like it. Do you have to define it? If you have to, maybe you do not feel confident about yourself? It is the game that probably your dad taught you long time ago. Now you play it for fun or play it professionally, or teach someone else how to play it. And you still do it, because you enjoy it. That is all you have to know about chess.

well, you can do both, argue and play chess, just not at the same time, i guess

feel better soon, @cuddly

It’s an observation. Nothing personal. You simply either completely misunderstood me or you do not understand language and definitions very well. Inflexible attention to truncated definitions is common in this thread. Inflexible thinking goes hand in hand with aversion to poetry. In that, you are not alone. In fact, you’re with the majority. That’s why I usually ignore this thread.

Poker being a sport is also something I (personally) disagree with. It's obviously a card game.

We have categories for activities for a reason. Otherwise, distinctions become muddy, or even meaningless.

There are card games. There are board games. And there are sports ...

If we start to take card games or board games and stuff them into the "sports" category, then we're simultaneously arguing that the "card game" or "board game" distinction is incorrect ... which is hard to agree with, since chess is clearly intended to be a board game.

it isnt a sport, not according to the IOC

Again, this is too personal. And ridiculous.

Most things fit in several categories.

Chess is a sport.

Obviously, sports are different than gender.

The US used to be about tolerance and freedom, individualism, live and let live, at least on paper. These days, not so much, at least not if they aren't exactly like us. We feel very free to not mind our own business, and to condemn.

When your either/or includes two things that are not mutually incompatible, you do not have an argument.

Baseball is a game.

Auto racing in a sport.

Hunting is a sport, especially when the animal is also hunting the hunter.

On and on, just a refusal to acknowledge that others don't use the term the same way you do. As if they have no right to decide for themselves or you're the authority here, a kind of final arbiter regarding words and their meanings. Everything that needed to be said has been said. But it's clearly personal for you now, a kind of contest, important or not (not). It's semantics, nothing else. Chess is what chess is, call it what you will. And it's just absurd for you to just keep saying the equivalent of "neener neener" to the idea that we all have the right to decide the matter for ourselves... then resorting to insult when someone disagrees (oh the nerve!). There is no consensus, and it is not for you to decide how others use the word 'sport'. Drop it.