I personally would not classify it as a sport, but, by definition, it is one. Sport: an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment. Exertion: physical or mental effort.
Is chess a sport?
Every couple of months, someone asks this same question.
It's easy to research the definittion of a sport and compare it to the definition of chess.
There shouldn't be any debate on the matter.
"Recognize", "consider", or "view" it however you like.
--- Yes indeed I recently learned about the folly of starting up a thread on this subject. You would not believe the gigantic amount of stupidity that I had to put up with in that thread, Good luck to the OP with this project ( be warned however that you might end up in therapy lol ).

Chess is a sport in the same way a circle is a square.
Absurd.
Chess is widely viewed as a sport in many parts of the world. But most people think of sports as involving competition where the emphasis is on physical agility and/or strength. Hence, the dictionary definition that dull plodders will turn to must be stretched a bit in order to accommodate more flexible usage.
Happily, the etymology of sport helps the word stretch in this manner. However, it runs the risk of allowing all sorts of amusements, even tiddlywinks.
What we need are better lexicographers.

Chess is a sport in the same way a circle is a square.
Absurd.
Chess is widely viewed as a sport in many parts of the world. But most people think of sports as involving competition where the emphasis is on physical agility and/or strength. Hence, the dictionary definition that dull plodders will turn to must be stretched a bit in order to accommodate more flexible usage.
Happily, the etymology of sport helps the word stretch in this manner. However, it runs the risk of allowing all sorts of amusements, even tiddlywinks.
What we need are better lexicographers.
Your asinine comment barely deserves a reply. But, as others also read this thread, ...
Please reread what I said about etymology and then read the Oxford dictionary entry: https://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/187476
That's not the dictionary the dull plodders are citing.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, chess fit easily within the definition with sport.
I readily admit that one can find many dictionary definitions that are less accommodating because the lexicographers of those texts aim at reductionist definitions. The scholars who edit the OED are less facile.

Chess is a sport in the same way a circle is a square.
Absurd.
Chess is widely viewed as a sport in many parts of the world. But most people think of sports as involving competition where the emphasis is on physical agility and/or strength. Hence, the dictionary definition that dull plodders will turn to must be stretched a bit in order to accommodate more flexible usage.
Happily, the etymology of sport helps the word stretch in this manner. However, it runs the risk of allowing all sorts of amusements, even tiddlywinks.
What we need are better lexicographers.
Your asinine comment barely deserves a reply. But, as others also read this thread, ...
Please reread what I said about etymology and then read the Oxford dictionary entry: https://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/187476
That's not the dictionary the dull plodders are citing.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, chess fit easily within the definition with sport.
I readily admit that one can find many dictionary definitions that are less accommodating because the lexicographers of those texts aim at reductionist definitions. The scholars who edit the OED are less facile.

Kowalski
What is obvious to the vast majority isn't so obvious to the small minority. There are still people who dont care what the definition of words are. I think most of the people who say chess is a sport dont really believe it. They are just trying to start an argument.
The people who think the definition of words include descriptions from 200 years ago aren't living in the present. Even the title of this topic should be a clue. "Is chess a sport" Not "was chess a sport". Maybe Ziryab doesn't understand that definitions of words change over time. Right now, there is no question, chess is not a sport. By definition.

Chess is a sport in the same way a circle is a square.
Absurd.
Chess is widely viewed as a sport in many parts of the world. But most people think of sports as involving competition where the emphasis is on physical agility and/or strength. Hence, the dictionary definition that dull plodders will turn to must be stretched a bit in order to accommodate more flexible usage.
Happily, the etymology of sport helps the word stretch in this manner. However, it runs the risk of allowing all sorts of amusements, even tiddlywinks.
What we need are better lexicographers.
Your asinine comment barely deserves a reply. But, as others also read this thread, ...
Please reread what I said about etymology and then read the Oxford dictionary entry: https://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/187476
That's not the dictionary the dull plodders are citing.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, chess fit easily within the definition with sport.
I readily admit that one can find many dictionary definitions that are less accommodating because the lexicographers of those texts aim at reductionist definitions. The scholars who edit the OED are less facile.
Now, you've succeeded in summarizing my original post, albeit with twice the verbiage.

Chess is a sport in the same way a circle is a square.
Absurd.
Chess is widely viewed as a sport in many parts of the world. But most people think of sports as involving competition where the emphasis is on physical agility and/or strength. Hence, the dictionary definition that dull plodders will turn to must be stretched a bit in order to accommodate more flexible usage.
Happily, the etymology of sport helps the word stretch in this manner. However, it runs the risk of allowing all sorts of amusements, even tiddlywinks.
What we need are better lexicographers.
Your asinine comment barely deserves a reply. But, as others also read this thread, ...
Please reread what I said about etymology and then read the Oxford dictionary entry: https://www.oed.com/viewdictionaryentry/Entry/187476
That's not the dictionary the dull plodders are citing.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, chess fit easily within the definition with sport.
I readily admit that one can find many dictionary definitions that are less accommodating because the lexicographers of those texts aim at reductionist definitions. The scholars who edit the OED are less facile.
Now, you've succeeded in summarizing my original post, albeit with twice the verbiage.

The International Olympic Committee recognizes chess as a "mind sport."
That being said, if a professional chess player called him/herself a "sportsman" or "athlete" it would be incredibly misleading. No matter the rigid definitions that we can call upon, people generally have a schema for sports limited to those games that require more physical activity than what chess requires.
For example, if your friend asked you to go play a sport in the park with her this weekend, you probably would be surprised when you find out that your friend wants to play bridge with you. Bridge is also identified as a sport by the IOC, but it was still misleading for her to call it a "sport" so colloquially.
I think a more interesting question is why some chess players so desperately want chess to be recognized as a sport?

The people who think the definition of words include descriptions from 200 years ago aren't living in the present. Even the title of this topic should be a clue. "Is chess a sport" Not "was chess a sport". Maybe Ziryab doesn't understand that definitions of words change over time. Right now, there is no question, chess is not a sport. By definition.
Is this the third or fourth thread where we have had this argument? I've lost count.
What I can recall, however, is that you have offered two points:
1) Tirelessly repeating a mantra of what the dictionary says about common usage.
I've acknowledged that point.
2) Offering increasingly absurd comparisons reduce the nuances of language to some sort of mathematical formula, while in the same breath accusing me of not understanding language.
Despite many Herculean efforts, no one has succeeded in reducing language to math. I'm not gonna take the time to walk you through the history of these efforts. I need to get to the range where I can engage in another sport that often involves me sitting on my behind, but first I need to get some exercise before it is too hot to walk my dog.
We agree that chess is not athletics.
I do not agree that the word sport is wholly free of historic meanings (no word is), nor that dictionaries account for how many use the term sport.
I've offered arguments that you seem to think that you have refuted by repeating the point I acknowledge at the outset. You have not yet addressed the crux of my assertion. Probably because you do not comprehend the nuance and flexibility at the heart of how "words change over time", nor how they change from context to context, nor ...
So, we are left with the trolls, like hikarunaku, posting images that miss the difference between sports and athletics; that is that accept tout court the mantra of the dull plodders.

Trolls like @Ziryab post mindless commentary over stupid topics.
Brilliant! Original! Sophisticated! Surprising deep and trenchant commentary!
Go away little boy.
At least the patriot gal acts like an adult, even if she lacks imagination.

Trolls like @Ziryab post mindless commentary over stupid topics.
Brilliant! Original! Sophisticated! Surprising deep and trenchant commentary!
Go away little boy.
At least the patriot gal acts like an adult, even if she lacks imagination.
You are the little one. I will take you and your dogs for a walk.

Trolls like @Ziryab post mindless commentary over stupid topics.
Brilliant! Original! Sophisticated! Surprising deep and trenchant commentary!
Go away little boy.
At least the patriot gal acts like an adult, even if she lacks imagination.
You are the little one. I will take you and your dogs for a walk.
Come along, then, child. See if you can keep up.

Trolls like @Ziryab post mindless commentary over stupid topics.
Brilliant! Original! Sophisticated! Surprising deep and trenchant commentary!
Go away little boy.
At least the patriot gal acts like an adult, even if she lacks imagination.
You are the little one. I will take you and your dogs for a walk.
Come along, then, child. See if you can keep up.
I will keep you on the leash or will you fetch a ball for me. I know dogs love it.
Chess is a sport in the same way a circle is a square.
Absurd.
Chess is widely viewed as a sport in many parts of the world. But most people think of sports as involving competition where the emphasis is on physical agility and/or strength. Hence, the dictionary definition that dull plodders will turn to must be stretched a bit in order to accommodate more flexible usage.
Happily, the etymology of sport helps the word stretch in this manner. However, it runs the risk of allowing all sorts of amusements, even tiddlywinks.
What we need are better lexicographers.
I guess it all depends on how you define "absurd". The people who think chess is a sport could easily argue a circle is a square. They are both shapes, they both have the same number of letters, they both are used in geometry, and they both aren't triangles. The similarities are so striking, there is no good reason to not call a circle a square (other than the definitions of course)