Is Chess a Sport?
Sort:
There is a qorld tournament and an official winner, so it is a sport. Anythime there is a competition and a winner, to me it is a sport.....
Apr 4, 2008
0
#23
Recently i was in the local libraries of a few neighbouring towns enquiring about chess clubs, one library kept that kind of information in their "sports" section, another kept info on chess clubs in their "leisure" section and another kept theirs in "hobbies".
So what about the Rubik's cube. That has a world championships, and is positively athletic compared to chess. Is 'cubing' a sport?
What about rock paper scissors? Is that a sport? Scrabble, bridge, and poker would all have to be sports. Other games like monopoly also apparently have or have had world championships. The following would also have to be sports: Air guitar, nettle eating, shovepenny, shin-kicking, beard and moustache growing (that's right, 'not shaving' is a sport), conkers, pokemon, pie eating, even golf.
if you mean mental sport then yes of course, but not so much physical.
Also, assuming your 'world championships' definition works both ways, we are forced to conclude that baseball isnt a sport, so at least your definition gets it right sometimes. 
I don't think chess is a sport. according to me, a "sport" is something that requires physical ability. Anyone who can sit down can learn how to play chess
Apr 4, 2008
0
#28
Chess is a game that may employ some of the attributes of a Sport and may employ some of the attributes of an Art while never really being either a sport or an art. When speaking of Chess as a Sport, we're referring to those sportive attributes and when speaking of Chess as an Art, we're referring to those artistic attributes.
Sothilde wrote:
That's not an argument ih8sens as tennis is a game too, while people do consider it a sport. So what are the criteria for something to be a sport as opposed to a game? I think something becomes a sport (wether it is a game or not) when there are championships for it.
Let's start a monopoly worldchampionship!
the criteri a4 a sport is tht it must be played by athletes
english grammer competition....not my stye....
Chess is a brain sport.
Ok...lots of good ideas on this topic. Here is my personal opinion...Chess is NOT a sport. On a different post somone made the connection that grandmaster use a great amount of mental energy to play chess, and increase the bloodflow to the brain. If the brain is considered a muscle, then chess must be a sport because of working that muscle so hard. I think if you go in that direction you could consider the SAT a sport.
I think a sport is a Physical activity, in which there is an offense and a defense competing agaist each other. I do NOT consider golf a sport, because there is no defense. I am an avid golfer with a 13 handicap and love the game. But still consider it a game/physical activity, not a sport. Most physical activities in my opinion, running, bowling, pool, track and field, most things you would find in the olympics are NOT sports by my defanition. They are called the olympic 'games' with individual events, not 'sports', although there are certian events in the olympics that are sports. So things like, Baseball, football, tennis, basketball are sports. I love chess and many physical activities and do not think classifiying them as an 'activity' or a 'game' should in anyway take away from our enjoyment of them. This is only my opinion. Thoughts?
Apr 5, 2008
0
#33
I'm somewhat tempted to promote the 'sport' label over the 'game' label because there is no random element in chess.
Typically, a 'game', like poker, has a random element to it. Poker requires some skill, but even the best poker players can be defeated through random chance.
In my view of a 'sport', this isn't possible. A random group of onlookers shouldn't be able to defeat an athletic sports team, because there isn't a random component that can decide the course of the game. This also is true of chess - you can't get lucky and beat a grandmaster at chess. You need skill (or opponent error) to win.
A sport is a game where tactics and strategy are invloved, and where people compitive to be the best, therefore, chess is sport. most GM try to stay in shape (running, playing tennis, etc.) to help them in tournaments and stuff. In chess you are not hitting each other or running around, but its still a sport. Also, theres no luck involved, as in monopoly or poker, and yes, i know you can learn to play poker or monopoly and always win, but theres still the element of luck, as in all sports, such thing does not exist (soccer, tennis, basketball, and yes, chess)
batgirl wrote: Chess is a game that may employ some of the attributes of a Sport and may employ some of the attributes of an Art while never really being either a sport or an art. When speaking of Chess as a Sport, we're referring to those sportive attributes and when speaking of Chess as an Art, we're referring to those artistic attributes.
Sorry batgirl, but that just a little too tautological for my taste. It works in the other threads too:
When speaking of Chess as sexist, we're referring to those sexist attributes and when speaking of Chess as racist, we're referring to those racist attributes.
Just because something is tautological does not mean it's a fallacy. I've loved discovering tautological truths at the base of many investigations.
"When speaking of Chess as sexist, we're referring to those sexist attributes (that we perceive it to have) and when speaking of Chess as racist, we're referring to those racist attributes (that we perceive it to have)".
Still works.
Since I can honestly say from experience that many things that are considered art require a considerably amount of physical exertion, "sport" and "art" aren't mutually exclusive adjectives, and thus, chess may very well be both a sport and art, as opposed to neither. This assuming that we all generally accept sport to be something requiring physical exertion, which is probably not the best definition, as many die-hard fans of most sports get a pretty decent workout from watching their respective sport. Unless being a fan is a sport...
(one example of art requiring physical exertion: go to the nearest philharmonic preformance, and count how many of them are sweating)
Lizard87 wrote:
I'm an active 2 handicapper, planning to return to +2 as fast as I can, and I do consider golf a sport :P No defense? How do you mean that? I played 35 holes of matchplay today, 1 on 1, direct battle (Yes, I won). I defend his good shots by playing even better shots myself. So sports by your definition can only be like team sports, and perhaps tennis? Ask Tiger whether golf is a sport or not. Try training with him for a day :P Ask any pro basically. Except for John Daly perhaps lol.
I know, off topic. But this might help shape the definition of 'games' being a sport or not.
Why dont we ask Tiger, or any other highly trained physical athlete whether they think chess is a sport......
Also...in golf...you are playing the course. The way your opponent hits a shot has no direct impact on how you hit yours, other than the mental factor. You are not "directly against him" You are playing the course, and whoever plays the course better is declared the winner.
Chess IS a sport... there is a set of rules... you compete in tournaments/leagues ....... you use your brain more than in any other sport... I've read somewhere that some rugby trainers compare rugby with chess! when they train their rugby players (children) -btw... show me a sport where you use your brain more... some sport you compete in teams...so it's not only you doing the thinking! Yeah Yeah chess! Chess is seen in most countries as a sport... but sadly still not in England...!
Apr 5, 2008
0
#40
"Sorry batgirl, but that just a little too tautological..."
It might be. . . if the argument was being used to define chess as either/both a sport or an art. However, you might notice that the argument is that while people may often speak of Chess in those terms simply because they identify some similar atributes in Chess, finding some similar attributes just makes Chess sportive or artistic rather than A Sport or An Art.
I think it's taut and it's logical, but I'm not sure it's tautological.
Then again, I might be wrong.
For the record the spilled-beer criterion was somewhat tongue in cheek and intended to evoke mental images of real sports being played with beer in hand. It was also intended, however, to allude to some kind of physical exertion which I believe is a valid criterion for an activity's classification as a sport.
As for drawing the line somewhere between chess and tiddly-winks, this seems much, much more arbitrary. What criteria landed your demarcation point there?