Is chess a sport? Ending the debate

Exactly. That doesn't reject the evidence that already supported the conclusion that chess is a sport. There doesn't need to be any causal relationship between the physical movement of the pieces and the mental skill used to decide where to physically move the pieces.

One could also argue aiming a gun at the target is more mental skill than physical as well as little physical exertion is required to move your finger enough to pull the trigger in the sport of competitive shooting.

Both sports.

Exertion just means to put forth. You can exert mentally or physically. The physical exerting of the chess pieces and pawns to the squares don't require any change in respiration. That we can agree on even though it has nothing to do with exertion. It's also a fact that the considerable force exerted between the Earth and the moon require no hard breathing at all and yet the force is exerted. Exertion doesn't require hard breathing.

The conclusion supplied in an earlier post is true and follows from the true premises that support it which proves the argument is valid and sound. I have already provided sufficient evidence to conclude chess is a sport.

I agree to disagree.  I believe that all sports are games, but not all games are sports.  Football (American or European) is both a game and a sport, but chess is only a game.   Strategy + mental exertion = game.  Strategy + mental exertion + physical exertion = sport.   The physical component is missing in chess, therefore it's a game.   That's why all sports are games, but not all games are sports.  The same as all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares and all thumbs are fingers, but not all fingers are thumbs.   Disclaimer:  It could be argued that OTB bullet chess, played outside in the summer time, could be an exception since it's very fast-paced and the constant slapping of the clock and the outdoor heat could result in an elevated heartbeat and possibly sweating.   However, an indoor, online chess game, played in the air conditioning, can in no way be categorized as a sport.  

The physical exertion of the input device used to move the pieces satisfies the physical exertion criterion which is the only debate because in addition to the physical exerting required to click the touchpad to move a piece, the sport of Chess is also frequently played competitively and according to a set of rules. There is no credible evidence against the conclusion that Chess can be classified as a sport and there is already sufficient conclusive evidence supporting Chess as a sport.

Chess is indisputably a (board)

game and arguably a sport.

Give it up, dude.  Even if you stretch the Webster's definition of "sport" to try to prove that some form of exertion exists in chess, it doesn't fit the widely known parameters of a sport.   There's no physical contact, no running or jumping, no sprained ankles or broken limbs, no ball, no net, no above average physical strength, weight or height required to excel at it and you can't pack a 100,000 seat stadium with spectators willing to pay $500 a seat to watch it.   You won't find those items mentioned in the dictionary definition of "sport" but they are requirements, nonetheless.   Even though I've proven, beyond any shadow of doubt, that chess is a board game (and not a sport), why does it even matter?   Is anyone saying that sports are better or more valuable to humankind than games?   Chess is the best board game ever invented and I will always love it.   It has its place in society and it can be argued that it is just as valuable to our civilization as any sport is.   However, it's not a sport and that's fine with me.   I'm willing to live with that, so why aren't you?

I won't be giving up anything "dude."

I don't need to stretch anything. That's what you have attempted to do.

You don't find those as requirements because they aren't requirements.

Not only are you incorrect in your claim that you have proven anything except your ignorance of what proof is, you also have failed to provide any evidence to support your claim.

Your insistence on asserting chess is not a sport in the face of evidence to the contrary and your unwillingness to do so without any evidence to support your claim is the question you'd be better served to answer than the one you asked.

Your conclusion that chess is not a sport is a non sequitur and your argument is invalid.

The fact that the majority of people that posted on here agree with me, that chess is not a sport, is proof enough.   Either view is just an opinion, because there is no real proof.   If you want an example of "evidence" ....... the fact that a skinny, wimpy, little man like Anatoly Karpov was the World Chess Champion, is evidence in my mind that chess is not a sport.   He was certainly no athlete and could never have been a champion football, baseball, basketball or hockey player, at his size.   You are beating a dead horse.  You lost the debate.   Deal with it and move on.  

lol  Yesssssssss!  Although someone (Not Me) could argue Karpov could be a jockey if they were beating a live horse ;)  

Yeah, ok.  He could have been a jockey.   lol   I guess jockeys are considered athletes.   Nice play off of my "beating a dead horse" comment, btw.      I stand corrected.  

To be sure, if bull's-eye  shooting or snooker are considered sports, then I can see why chess can be a sport. On the other hand, officially naming chess a sport most probably has to do with practical reasons in an effort to promote the game (sport?!), and very little to do with academic parameters. Just my opinion.

lol.. I still applaud your view!  They didn't listen to me and they probably won't listen to you.    

Both shooting and snooker take hand, eye, and body coordination

Not sure that I would consider snooker, billiards or pool to be sports either.   Although, they are slightly more physically demanding than chess, since you have to stand up to play them and there is a little bit of physical "exertion" when you break.   So, snooker might fall into an in-between category, along with target shooting, darts, archery and bowling.  

Video games also take hand-eye coordination, but they are not sports.  Shooting could be considered a sport, due to the gun being heavy and having a kick, I guess.  lol   When most people think of sports, they think of football, baseball, basketball, hockey, soccer, rugby, gymnastics, track and field, swimming, etc.   Even dancing and cheerleading can be considered sports.  But snooker?   Ehh.  

JeffGreen, You lost the debate.

Once again you fail to provide any evidence to support your claim.

Your attempt to use "the fact that the majority of people on here agree with me is  proof enough" is no proof at all.

That is in fact a fallacy you're leaning on called argumentum ad populum that concludes a proposition is true because many or most people believe it.

It's just another fallacy.

I've never lost a debate in my entire life and I sure didn't lose this one.   There's no running, no jumping, no muscle needed, no sweating, no injuries ...... it's not a sport.  It's not even close to being a sport, really.   You can play chess, sitting on your butt, on a comfortable chair, in the air conditioning.   Pin the Tail on the Donkey is more of a sport than chess.   lol   At least you play that standing up.  

I guess if one can come to terms with the idea that "nervous system exertion" is indeed a form of physical exertion, then chess meets the requirements to be called a sport. 

Since this debate is purely based on opinions, yes, the majority opinion wins out over the minority.  People decide what is a sport and what isn't.   If the majority of people say it isn't, then it isn't.  If you disagree with the majority, then you are wrong.  Not them.   Ask any NFL football player if he thinks that chess is a sport and he would laugh at you.   In fact, American football is the perfect comparison, because it's the sporting equivalent of chess.   The lineman are like pawns, the tight ends are like bishops, wide receivers are like rooks, the running backs are like knights, the quarterback is like the queen, the football is like the king and you are like the head coach.   Football is a game, but also a sport, because it involves physical contact, running, jumping, tackling, throwing and kicking.  Chess is like football without the sporting aspects.   It's like one long football play, but without any of the physicality mentioned above.   Think about it.