You can view it as a sport or as a board game, or both.
If you say that darts is a sport, or snooker for instance, and both of those are listed as sports, then why isn't chess a sport? Those 2 are games of precision, are they not? Chess is a game of precision as well.
Neither of those have a visible physical aspect in them, but I can tell you that you will sweat more if you play 1 chess game for 2 hours than playing billiards for the same amount of time. And you will certainly be more tired after playing chess (though it is most mental tiredness if I may say so).
So it depends on what do you view as a sport. If you only account for activities where you run, or swim or generally use your muscles, then chess is not a sport. But if some of the above is a sport for you, then chess should be as well.
Of course, that is only my opinion.
is chess a sport?
Since some of you people are doubting chess is a sport, here are a few reasons it is a sport...
Excellent post. Great set of reasons. It should not be in any doubt.
You can view it as a sport or as a board game, or both.
If you say that darts is a sport, or snooker for instance, and both of those are listed as sports, then why isn't chess a sport? Those 2 are games of precision, are they not? Chess is a game of precision as well.
Neither of those have a visible physical aspect in them, but I can tell you that you will sweat more if you play 1 chess game for 2 hours than playing billiards for the same amount of time. And you will certainly be more tired after playing chess (though it is most mental tiredness if I may say so).
So it depends on what do you view as a sport. If you only account for activities where you run, or swim or generally use your muscles, then chess is not a sport. But if some of the above is a sport for you, then chess should be as well.
Of course, that is only my opinion.
Except that both darts and snooker are games of physical skill. Which makes them sports. It's the physical ability, the agility, the movements, the precise motion that makes someone successful at darts. None of those things matter in chess. Chess is a mental game, not a physical one.
Someone with no arms or legs can play chess just fine. Maybe even excel because of their handicap. But how well is someone with no arms or legs going to do at darts?
People can consider chess a sport all they want, it doesn't hurt anything. But it's not a sport. They might say chess is competitive, and even stressful, therefore it's a sport. With rules and governing bodies and all that. Well that makes driving to work a sport too. It's HIGHLY competitive, usually stressful, and definitely has rules and governing bodies. Those rules by the way usually apply to someone else, not the person late for work.
Yes. And the people who play and excel at pool is based purely on physical skill. That's why people with no arms and no legs do not play pool. It's a game of physical skill. Which makes it a sport. There is no minimum or maximum amount of skill required to play sports. But there must be some.
Usually the most difficult sports are the ones where the perception of physical skill is small. Golf in particular. Some people think golf requires little physical skill. But some great athletes, like Michael Jordan, have said golf is the most difficult sport there is. Even more difficult than what he excelled at, basketball and baseball.
But chess requires zero physical skill. None. Which again is why people with no physical abilities, no arms or legs, can play chess just fine. In fact, I would bet the people who are severely disabled who play chess are on average BETTER than the average physically able chess player.
You can view it as a sport or as a board game, or both.
If you say that darts is a sport, or snooker for instance, and both of those are listed as sports, then why isn't chess a sport? Those 2 are games of precision, are they not? Chess is a game of precision as well.
Neither of those have a visible physical aspect in them, but I can tell you that you will sweat more if you play 1 chess game for 2 hours than playing billiards for the same amount of time. And you will certainly be more tired after playing chess (though it is most mental tiredness if I may say so).
So it depends on what do you view as a sport. If you only account for activities where you run, or swim or generally use your muscles, then chess is not a sport. But if some of the above is a sport for you, then chess should be as well.
Of course, that is only my opinion.
Except that both darts and snooker are games of physical skill. Which makes them sports. It's the physical ability, the agility, the movements, the precise motion that makes someone successful at darts. None of those things matter in chess. Chess is a mental game, not a physical one.
Someone with no arms or legs can play chess just fine. Maybe even excel because of their handicap. But how well is someone with no arms or legs going to do at darts?
People can consider chess a sport all they want, it doesn't hurt anything. But it's not a sport. They might say chess is competitive, and even stressful, therefore it's a sport. With rules and governing bodies and all that. Well that makes driving to work a sport too. It's HIGHLY competitive, usually stressful, and definitely has rules and governing bodies. Those rules by the way usually apply to someone else, not the person late for work.
How about this event:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_at_the_2006_Asian_Games
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_at_the_2010_Asian_Games
These are not really Olympic games, but it is surely a big continental event.
By the way I see that chess players were declared sportsman of the year in some countries before. For instance that is the case with Gligoric in Yugoslavia along with others mentioned already.
I think so, but if you ask a non-chess player, they of course would say no.
they don't count
You can view it as a sport or as a board game, or both.
If you say that darts is a sport, or snooker for instance, and both of those are listed as sports, then why isn't chess a sport? Those 2 are games of precision, are they not? Chess is a game of precision as well.
Neither of those have a visible physical aspect in them, but I can tell you that you will sweat more if you play 1 chess game for 2 hours than playing billiards for the same amount of time. And you will certainly be more tired after playing chess (though it is most mental tiredness if I may say so).
So it depends on what do you view as a sport. If you only account for activities where you run, or swim or generally use your muscles, then chess is not a sport. But if some of the above is a sport for you, then chess should be as well.
Of course, that is only my opinion.
Except that both darts and snooker are games of physical skill. Which makes them sports. It's the physical ability, the agility, the movements, the precise motion that makes someone successful at darts. None of those things matter in chess. Chess is a mental game, not a physical one.
Someone with no arms or legs can play chess just fine. Maybe even excel because of their handicap. But how well is someone with no arms or legs going to do at darts?
People can consider chess a sport all they want, it doesn't hurt anything. But it's not a sport. They might say chess is competitive, and even stressful, therefore it's a sport. With rules and governing bodies and all that. Well that makes driving to work a sport too. It's HIGHLY competitive, usually stressful, and definitely has rules and governing bodies. Those rules by the way usually apply to someone else, not the person late for work.
How about this event:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_at_the_2006_Asian_Games
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_at_the_2010_Asian_Games
These are not really Olympic games, but it is surely a big continental event.
By the way I see that chess players were declared sportsman of the year in some countries before. For instance that is the case with Gligoric in Yugoslavia along with others mentioned already.
Yes, sometimes regional events (national events too) have chess. But we were talking about the Olympics. A world wide event. It would be interesting to see what the viewership was during those games. Chess is very popular, but nobody likes to watch it. Especially on TV. When chess competes with sports, sports will win every time. Who is going to watch chess over, say, golf or martial arts, or baseball?
I think so, but if you ask a non-chess player, they of course would say no.
they don't count
Does that mean people who don't play sports don't get an opinion on what a sport is? It's also interesting that most people who play chess think chess is not a sport. The opinion that chess could be a sport is a very minority one, worldwide at least. Of course there are going to be exceptions, but most people, everywhere, know chess is a game, not a sport.
You can view it as a sport or as a board game, or both.
If you say that darts is a sport, or snooker for instance, and both of those are listed as sports, then why isn't chess a sport? Those 2 are games of precision, are they not? Chess is a game of precision as well.
Neither of those have a visible physical aspect in them, but I can tell you that you will sweat more if you play 1 chess game for 2 hours than playing billiards for the same amount of time. And you will certainly be more tired after playing chess (though it is most mental tiredness if I may say so).
So it depends on what do you view as a sport. If you only account for activities where you run, or swim or generally use your muscles, then chess is not a sport. But if some of the above is a sport for you, then chess should be as well.
Of course, that is only my opinion.
Except that both darts and snooker are games of physical skill. Which makes them sports. It's the physical ability, the agility, the movements, the precise motion that makes someone successful at darts. None of those things matter in chess. Chess is a mental game, not a physical one.
Someone with no arms or legs can play chess just fine. Maybe even excel because of their handicap. But how well is someone with no arms or legs going to do at darts?
People can consider chess a sport all they want, it doesn't hurt anything. But it's not a sport. They might say chess is competitive, and even stressful, therefore it's a sport. With rules and governing bodies and all that. Well that makes driving to work a sport too. It's HIGHLY competitive, usually stressful, and definitely has rules and governing bodies. Those rules by the way usually apply to someone else, not the person late for work.
How about this event:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_at_the_2006_Asian_Games
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_at_the_2010_Asian_Games
These are not really Olympic games, but it is surely a big continental event.
By the way I see that chess players were declared sportsman of the year in some countries before. For instance that is the case with Gligoric in Yugoslavia along with others mentioned already.
Yes, sometimes regional events (national events too) have chess. But we were talking about the Olympics. A world wide event. It would be interesting to see what the viewership was during those games. Chess is very popular, but nobody likes to watch it. Especially on TV. When chess competes with sports, sports will win every time. Who is going to watch chess over, say, golf or martial arts, or baseball?
The question of the topic is "Is chess a sport". We already know that chess is not an Olympic sport, but there are many other sports that aren't as well for various reasons.
As for viewership... not every sport is interesting to watch, but it is still a sport and some are even Olympic sports. For instance, archery, shooting... I am sure there are other sports that are not that interesting for an average viewer. There are simply some sports that are not that interesting for TV. 
Yes, but if they consider it a sport, and you are saying "iT hAs tO Be iN ThE oLymPicS tO bE a sPorT", and the IOC considers it a sport, that is literally counterarguing your own argument, sure it isn't in the Olympics, but THE SAME PEOPLE WHO RUN THE OLYMPICS SAY THAT CHESS IS A SPORT. What about that do you not get. Chess is a sport, no matter what you say or think. Yes, Chess isn't in the Olympics, but neither is Bowling. The freaking IOC says Chess is a sport. A sport does not have to be in the Olympic games to be considered a sport. Open your gosh darn eyes and learn to see.
We all agree a biased corrupt organization says chess could be a sport. No question about it. But the IOC doesn't decide what a sport is. People do.
For example a relatively new sport, snowboarding, nobody questions. It didn't even exist until recently. But everyone agrees it's a sport. It passes the test, regardless of what the IOC might say. Many other sports are the same way. MOST sports are not in the Olympics, but they are still sports. The IOC isn't a determining body on what sports are.
To define a word, we either ask the dictionary, or just ask what the popular perception is. If I ask you how many sides does a square have, and you insist it's 5, because an organization says it's 5, that doesn't mean it has 5. It just means someone believes it should have 5. (they want to count the "inside" as a side. But the dictionary, and popular opinion, say a square has 4 sides. So either words have meaning, or they don't. Chess, by definition, by design, and by purpose, is not a sport. It literally (by definition) is not a sport.
It's ok to believe chess is a sport. It's competitive, it's challenging, all that stuff. But it's not a sport. Not until we change the definition of sport at least.
Yes, but society is pretty stupid. Why do you think Covid is such a big deal and is still around. It's because society thinks that masks are bad, that vaccines cause autism, and 5g is evil. Society is pretty moronic.
I agree
@lfPatriotGames, it is clear you think Chess isn't a sport, and you don't want to be convinced otherwise. I respect that, but I just want you to know that you are utterly and unambiguously incorrect in this matter.
It doesn't matter what I think. Chess isn't a sport, regardless of my personal opinion. The dictionary is pretty clear on what the meaning of these words are. I don't get to decide otherwise.
It's no different than if my personal opinion was a square has 5 sides. My opinion doesn't matter. A square has 4 sides, and chess is not a sport. Regardless of my opinion.
Hmm maybe not. But something close to one. Thermonuclear corncobs
I guess if you can't convince a monkey that chess is a sport, you better hope that it doesn't pass on it's genes
I wouldn't worry about it. You most likely can't convince anyone that chess could be a sport. Most people have access to dictionaries, so no amount of convincing is going to work. Once we change the definition of the word sport to include things that require no physical skill (like dice and coin flipping and daydreaming) then chess and everything else will be sports. Until then, we are stuck with the current definition of words.
But good luck. You should try where others have failed. Go to your nearest sports bar, you probably have one within a few miles of where you live. Go inside and insist that a game of chess be played on the TVs at that sports bar. Your reasoning is very simple. Chess is a sport, right? See how that works out.
Oh, and don't forget to tell them that if they can't be convinced that chess is a sport, they are all monkeys. At this point you are probably going to need a LOT of luck. It will be an interesting strategy. Let me know how much the hospital bill is.
It isn't a matter of opinion. Chess is a sport. It meets the qualifications of the definition. It isn't a matter of opinion, and if you think it is not a sport, you are in a small group which believes it is opinionated.
It isn't a matter of opinion. Chess is a sport. It meets the qualifications of the definition. It isn't a matter of opinion, and if you think it is not a sport, you are in a small group which believes it is opinionated.
It's only a matter of opinion if you don't believe in dictionaries. By definition (yes, the definition of the word sport) chess cannot be included. It just depends on your personal feelings about how and which words should and shouldn't have meaning. People try this tactic all the time in traffic court.
When the officer says you were speeding, it depends on the definition of speeding right? I mean, if words don't really have any meaning, then 85 in a 45 isn't speeding. Instead, it's just forward progress.
Yeah no thanks, I don't need to go anywhere, and even then it wouldn't prove anything, and obviously, you are stubborn and won't listen to reason, so why should I bother?
Again, I'm not stubborn. The dictionary is stubborn. Someday it might change, but that day is not today. I don't care or even have a say in the matter. Other people decided it for me. The word sport precludes things like chess and any other non physical skill activity. It's not my call. It's not my "opinion". It just is. At least until the definition of these words change.
Except the IOC doesn't get to define words. They could "recognize" Monopoly as a sport. Doesn't mean it is. Besides, that still doesn't answer the two main questions. Why isn't chess in the Olympics? And why is it not listed under any of the summer or winter games?
Words are defined by society, and as a result, end up in things like dictionaries. So, does society consider chess a sport? Do you see chess televised at sports bars along with golf and football?
No. Why? Because people would leave laughing. That's why. Society (correctly) says chess is not a sport because it lacks the one thing that makes all sports, sports. Physical skill.