There are two rules that determine if an endeavor is a recreational activity rather than a sport. Only meeting one of the three will qualify that activity as recreational. They are:
If one throws or hits a ball and no one is there to hit, run or throw it back.
If one can carry beer onto the field of play.
How’s this for sport v. competition argument?
Sport - someone is physically trying to prevent you from obtaining your objective.
Competiton - everything else.
Sports - football, baseball, hockey, water polo, tennis, NASCAR, wrestling, boxing, MMA,
Competitions: cheerleading, powerlifting, olympic lifting, track and field events, swimming, poker, gymnastics, golf, fishing.
See, a nice, easy definition, and no talking myself into a corner.
[quote]superscience wrote:
Because of the state powerlifting is in, powerlifting is just 3 simple exercises badly performed with silly equipment.
Olympic lifting is a complex skill also.
I’m not asking for an argument, it’s just my opinion. [/quote]
To me, my squat was nearly as difficult to get right as my clean (neither of which are perfect yet).
I think you’re misjudging how much technique goes into those 3 “simple” exercises.
An untrained eye could also think it’s simple to throw a bar over their heads too.
[quote]Weapon X991 wrote:
How’s this for sport v. competition argument?
Sport - someone is physically trying to prevent you from obtaining your objective.
Competiton - everything else.
Sports - football, baseball, hockey, water polo, tennis, NASCAR, wrestling, boxing, MMA,
Competitions: cheerleading, powerlifting, olympic lifting, track and field events, swimming, poker, gymnastics, golf, fishing.
See, a nice, easy definition, and no talking myself into a corner.[/quote]
In all of the sports you labeled as competitions, other people are physically trying to prevent you from achieving the objective of placing first by physically performing the sport better.
[quote]Weapon X991 wrote:
How’s this for sport v. competition argument?
Sport - someone is physically trying to prevent you from obtaining your objective.
Competiton - everything else.
Sports - football, baseball, hockey, water polo, tennis, NASCAR, wrestling, boxing, MMA,
Competitions: cheerleading, powerlifting, olympic lifting, track and field events, swimming, poker, gymnastics, golf, fishing.
See, a nice, easy definition, and no talking myself into a corner.[/quote]
the problem is that there has to be a middle ground. gymnastics, cheering, o-lifting, track, pl, swimming, are all in a different category from golf, fishing and poker.
oh, and for every one person on this site who’ll will argue with your definition and say PL and OL ARE sports, you’ll have TEN TIMES that many people arguing in favor of simming and track and field.
[quote]supermick wrote:
malonetd wrote:
That One Guy wrote:
whos to say what constitutes a sport anyway…
The dictionary?
Not really. The dictionary gives generic definitions. To see what constitutes a sport needs a specific definition by a relevant academic such as a sport historian for example (IMHO).
I like coakleys example ‘institutionalized competitive activity that involves vigorous physical exertion or the use of relatively complex physical skills by individuals whose participation is motivated by a combination of intrinsic (e.g., self-satisfaction that comes with competition) and extrinsic (e.g., money and public adoration) factors.’
Either way, the prick who said WL and PL were not sports needs castrating.[/quote]
I like that definition, but you realize that it means that double dutch and cheerleading are sports. I don’t have a problem with that, but I’m sure many others do.
[quote]malonetd wrote:
supermick wrote:
malonetd wrote:
That One Guy wrote:
whos to say what constitutes a sport anyway…
The dictionary?
Not really. The dictionary gives generic definitions. To see what constitutes a sport needs a specific definition by a relevant academic such as a sport historian for example (IMHO).
I like coakleys example ‘institutionalized competitive activity that involves vigorous physical exertion or the use of relatively complex physical skills by individuals whose participation is motivated by a combination of intrinsic (e.g., self-satisfaction that comes with competition) and extrinsic (e.g., money and public adoration) factors.’
Either way, the prick who said WL and PL were not sports needs castrating.
I like that definition, but you realize that it means that double dutch and cheerleading are sports. I don’t have a problem with that, but I’m sure many others do.[/quote]
well - i actually picked a liberal defination. As usual when you look into these things they can become quite detailed and i prefer sporting definitions to emphesise the ‘physical’.
My are has produced 2 darts world champs, and i dont believe darts to be a sport. Cheerleading though - thats demanding, those girls or guys are athletic as fuck. Sport for sure imo.
[quote]supermick wrote:
malonetd wrote:
That One Guy wrote:
whos to say what constitutes a sport anyway…
The dictionary?
Not really. The dictionary gives generic definitions. To see what constitutes a sport needs a specific definition by a relevant academic such as a sport historian for example (IMHO).
I like coakleys example ‘institutionalized competitive activity that involves vigorous physical exertion or the use of relatively complex physical skills by individuals whose participation is motivated by a combination of intrinsic (e.g., self-satisfaction that comes with competition) and extrinsic (e.g., money and public adoration) factors.’
Either way, the prick who said WL and PL were not sports needs castrating.[/quote]
I am with a 100%
To me fighting is the pinnacle of sport, because the winner represents physical dominance… or the best use of the body towards dominance.
My List from most sporting to least:
MMA
Football
Power/Olympic Lifting
Basketball
Track
Swimming
Golf
Poker
A sport should be as objective as possible in measuring the winner. (It should also require a high level of physical prowess, unlike poker for example).
ex1: the puck crosses the line or does not cross the line in hockey to gain a point
ex2: The weight is successfully lifted overhead or the weight is not successfully lifted overhead
(yes, refs call penalties, but they are theoretically not supposed to determine the winner via subjective judgement. The puck crossed the line or did not cross the line - two mutually exclusive events)
Figures skating - like bodybuilding - requires subjectivity to determine the winner. Although the performance is judged on a number of objective criteria, the ultimate decision is made by the judge:
ex1: the French judge thought the Russian pair skated a better routine
ex2: judge x thought competitor y’s shoulders lacked symmetry in relation to the rest of his body.
There is a large grey area.
I am not saying that figure skaters and bodybuilders are not extremely gifted or athletic with regard to their endeavor, but that these competitions require too much subjectivity takes away from the meaning of sport. When a panel can decide the winner, it becomes less of a sport*.
*edit: because you are no longer competing against the competition; you are satisfying a set of subjectively assessed criteria.
[quote]Mowgli wrote:
A sport should be as objective as possible in measuring the winner. (It should also require a high level of physical prowess, unlike poker for example).
ex1: the puck crosses the line or does not cross the line in hockey to gain a point
ex2: The weight is successfully lifted overhead or the weight is not successfully lifted overhead
(yes, refs call penalties, but they are theoretically not supposed to determine the winner via subjective judgement. The puck crossed the line or did not cross the line - two mutually exclusive events)
Figures skating - like bodybuilding - requires subjectivity to determine the winner. Although the performance is judged on a number of objective criteria, the ultimate decision is made by the judge:
ex1: the French judge thought the Russian pair skated a better routine
ex2: judge x thought competitor y’s shoulders lacked symmetry in relation to the rest of his body.
There is a large grey area.
I am not saying that figure skaters and bodybuilders are not extremely gifted or athletic with regard to their endeavor, but that these competitions require too much subjectivity takes away from the meaning of sport. When a panel can decide the winner, it becomes less of a sport*.
*edit: because you are no longer competing against the competition; you are satisfying a set of subjectively assessed criteria.
[/quote]
well, the idea that if you have judges you are being judged subjectively isnt even true in some sports with judges. For example, gymnastics. Yes, the gymnasts receive scores, but the criteria the judges are supposed to be checking that teh gymnast met are pretty objective eg, stepping out on the floor exercise, rings shaking, etc
[quote]KBCThird wrote:
well, the idea that if you have judges you are being judged subjectively isnt even true in some sports with judges. For example, gymnastics. Yes, the gymnasts receive scores, but the criteria the judges are supposed to be checking that teh gymnast met are pretty objective eg, stepping out on the floor exercise, rings shaking, etc [/quote]
True, the criteria is objective. But when form is judged it does become subjective and it’s pretty much inescapable. I’m not familiar with gymnastics, but consider figure skating:
They are asked to judge based on criteria that are as objective as possible, but the score differs from one judge to another. An objective basis of judgement would yield exactly the same score from each judge.
Therefore, perception does factor in.
I want to reiterate that it doesn’t take away from a gymnast’s or figure skater’s athleticism. But the nature of the competition is definitely changed.
[quote]Mowgli wrote:
An objective basis of judgement would yield exactly the same score from each judge.
Therefore, perception does factor in.
I want to reiterate that it doesn’t take away from a gymnast’s or figure skater’s athleticism. But the nature of the competition is definitely changed. [/quote]
The reason I disagree with this is that officials in ANY sport will have different perceptions. Football and basketball officials will sometimes overturn one another’s calls if they had a better view. They’ll conference on the field, no doubt hashing out different views of the play.
Sure, they SHOULD all have the same view as to exactly what happened on a play, but the fact is they dont. So in my opinion the difference between judges in gymnastics (i really know nothing about figure skating) and referees in football, basketball etc (if indeed there is a difference at all) is much smaller than you present
[quote]KBCThird wrote:
fair argument
[/quote]
I never denied that subjectivity was at least partly a factor of any score (regardless of the sport).
But in judge-based scoring, the judge is central to the functioning of the competition and scoring. A progressive scale is used. It is the judge’s call as to how well (and not whether) criteria were met.
In the other case, the judge is (relatively speaking) accessory to the competition and scoring. He serves to regulate play, but not score. Mutually exclusive events are used to determine scores (did (not) cross the line, whether it was a pretty goal or not).
Because you are not competing with the immediate direct objective of beating your opponent, but rather with the secondary objective of beating your opponent and the immediate direct objective of fulfilling a set of criteria to be judged, it takes away from my personal meaning of competition. That’s where my grey line is.
[quote]KO421 wrote:
what sports don’t have “specialized skills”[/quote]
deadlifting?
[quote]Mowgli wrote:
KBCThird wrote:
fair argument
… It is the judge’s call as to how well (and not whether) criteria were met…[/quote]
I think this is where we have to agree to disagree. As I said I know nothing about figure skating, and as far as scoring goes, nothing about bodybuilding. But the criteria that needs to be met and how it should be determined to have been met (or not met) is pretty clear, as well as being objective
there really isn’t a grey area when defining sport. it’s not so complicated as you all make it out.
sport means alot of things and all of them fall under the blanket of recreation or having fun. athleticism does not need to be involved. nor does competition. fishing, camping, card playing, and shooting the shit @ the pub are all sport. they are not physical sports. they are not competitive sport. but they are sport. if you’re wearing a sportscoat you are a sport.
look at it this way, sport has a contextual identity. sport is ANY activity you pursue when you’re not working. “gone fishing” , i.e. stick your pole in the ground, have a beer, and take a nap, is probably the king of all sport.
the concept of “professional sport” is, for the athletes, an oxymoron; it’s their job and when it’s a responsibility to play it’s not a sport to them. however for rest of us, and we outnumber them by about 5 billion to 1, it is sport if we spend hours watching it, talking about it, betting on it etc. if i’m closing a deal with a guy it’s business. the minute we finish and start talking red sox we are engaged in sport. likewise if curt schilling is in the backyard playing pepper with his kids then he’s engaged in sport. but not when he’s on the hill racking up k’s. then it’s sport for us.