Why is chess not at the olympics?

Chess has been around for hundreds of years. Even before the modern Olympics. New sports are recognized (snowboarding for example) all the time. Even though chess is not in the Olympics, why do you think the IOC (which we can all agree is very corrupt) has taken so  long to say chess is a sport?

It actually does, the definition of a sport is: a particular activity (such as an athletic game) so engaged in, which means that a sport doesn't have to be an athletic game.  Chess fits that definition. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sport  

The IOC saying chess is a sport is like Vito Corleone saying his family business is completely legit. 

Sometimes you have to consider the source. 

Actually, it doesn't. Read the definition you just posted. Physical. Athletic game. Chess, by definition, is not a sport. I can read the definition for you, but I can't understand it for you. That part is up to you. 

An activity engaged in? Looks like anime is a sport now O.O

Read definition c (2), it says SUCH AS an athletic game, meaning it doesn't have to be an athletic game, it's just can be.

Yes, such as an athletic game. Shouldn't be that difficult to understand. It also emphasizes the physical aspect. Chess is a mental game, not a physical one. It's not athletic. Some dictionaries give examples, like soccer. Why do you suppose they never give examples such as Monopoly or Clue or other board games?

Then is competitive eating a sport? 

If the definition were to include things OTHER than athletic games or physical skill contests, why wouldn't it say that? Why wouldn't it say "including but not limited to athletic games"?

Probably. It's a physical skill contest. 

Monopoly and Clue are games of luck, chess is not. 

You don't need to be that specific, when you use the words: such as, you are implying that it's "including but not limited to." 

Luck has nothing to do with defining a sport or game. Under the definition of sport, why do they never include checkers or soduko? Are those games of luck too?

The REASON the dictionary doesn't say "including but not limited to" is because it doesn't apply. Sometimes the dictionary DOES say that, if it applies. Here is does not. It's not mentioned because all sports are athletic games. It's how the word is defined. 

Now look up the definition of chess. What's the first the words you are likely to see? "a board game". 

Isn't Curling an Olympic sport? Shooting? Archery?

I can name a few more.

Do you know that breakdancing will be included in the 2024 Olympics as a sport?

Checkers is a solved game, so there is no point in adding it to the Olympics.

Really?? I didn't know curling is a sport that requires no muscle use. Shooting and archery also huh? Thats amazing. So quadrapalegics and people with no muscle use can actively engage in, and even excel at  curling and archery?? Do you mind expanding on that a bit. Maybe just explain a little bit, in detail, how that works specifically. Like,  oh I don't know, how the archer pulls the arrow back without using arms or hands. I'm curious how that works. 

I see. So is there some comment, some requirement, some indication that the Olympic committee only considers unsolved games for inclusion in the Olympics? You seem to be wandering off a bit. Lets try to stay on topic. 

I'm pretty sure luck and whether or not a game is solved have nothing to do with an activity in the Olympics. Pretty much all sports involve some element of luck. And I'm also pretty sure none of the sports currently in the Olympics are "solved". 

"Such as" gives an example. It is not limited to that. For example, "There are many different types of noodles, such as ramen and udon." Now, are those the only noodles?

thank you

Well put.  I'll bet every current Olympic event would have higher ratings, with both men and women, than chess would. 

Chess is fun to play, but incredibly boring to watch. 

 And cars are running much faster than humans, so there is no point including races in the Olympics.