skateboarding, haha, high risk of injury, please tell that to Dale Earnhardt, Eric Medlen or Scott Kalitta. Ask them how dangerous racing is. Rather, you would have to ask their families or teams because they all DIED in the sport they love doing.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What "sports" do you not consider to be sports?
- Thread starter Unspeaked
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
skateboarding, haha, high risk of injury, please tell that to Dale Earnhardt, Eric Medlen or Scott Kalitta. Ask them how dangerous racing is. Rather, you would have to ask their families or teams because they all DIED in the sport they love doing.
An organized Dance Dance Revolution tournament at an arcade should technically be considered a sport. It's a competition that can be measured and is played for someone to win. That makes it a sport. Conversely, DDR played only for fun, not competing against anyone else, cannot be considered a sport.
obviously there is not a precise definition of what is a 'sport' and to any given one you can likely come up with exceptions of 'sports' that are excluded and 'non-sports' that are included.
I think all sports requires some level of technical skills, athletic prowess, competitive context and objective measurement.
what make them 'sports' instead of exhibitions, physical exercises or games is the balance of those requirements, an objective "scoring" system and context.
for example:
If I skate around a pond leisurely, i am not practicing a sport.
If i time my lap around the same pond or race someone, it is a sport.
If I jump and twirl around with my girlfriend, I am again not practicing a sport even if it requires mad skills and athleticism and even is someone thinks we are doing it 'better' than you and your partner.
Put a rigorous scoring system to track the height, speed and difficulty of the jumps and twirls (regardless of how 'well' we do them) and we are back to the sports category.
I think all sports requires some level of technical skills, athletic prowess, competitive context and objective measurement.
what make them 'sports' instead of exhibitions, physical exercises or games is the balance of those requirements, an objective "scoring" system and context.
for example:
If I skate around a pond leisurely, i am not practicing a sport.
If i time my lap around the same pond or race someone, it is a sport.
If I jump and twirl around with my girlfriend, I am again not practicing a sport even if it requires mad skills and athleticism and even is someone thinks we are doing it 'better' than you and your partner.
Put a rigorous scoring system to track the height, speed and difficulty of the jumps and twirls (regardless of how 'well' we do them) and we are back to the sports category.
sport |spôrt|
noun
1. an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment.
So, let's reset the discussion, shall we?
So, MR is a sport?
+1 and Horseback racing (unless we give the trophy to the horse).
Wow! That's one of the most ignorant and uninformed assessments of motorsports I have ever heard. It's clearly obvious you have never done any kind of high-performance driving event (and I'm not talking about immature drunken throttle mashing down public roads with your buddies). I have experience driving at high speeds on track (with a BMW M3, M5, M6, and MINI JCW), and can assure you it is very draining and physically demanding. Do a weekend of track sessions at speed on a road circuit and you will be muscle sore and get the best night's sleep ever.
Race car drivers have to be in top physical form, or they would never be able to perform at competetive levels. F1 drivers, for example, experience lateral forces approaching 5 Gs and they do that hundreds of times in 2 hour race. That's like having a 50 lb. head trying to twist off at the neck. Braking requires tremendous force, like bench pressing hundreds of lbs, and you are doing it constantly for hours. During the course of a race, for example, F1 drivers have the same heart rate as a marathon runner. Endurance driving is yet another thing.
Try watching the 24 Hrs. of Daytona this weekend, the 12 Hrs of Sebring in March, or the 24 Hrs of Le Mans in June and tell me you still believe your statements.
At least someone around here knows what they are talking about. Yeah, Dakar is certainly one of the most grueling events. The 24 Hrs. of Le Mans and 12 Hrs. of Sebring are sonafabitches too.
I always liked the quote attributed to Ernest Hemingway, "There are only three sports: bullfighting, mountain climbing, and auto-racing. Everything else is just a game."
If you think dancing is non-athletic take a month's worth of ballet classes then come back and tell us if it's 'non-athletic'.
Agreed. While you're at it, if anyone thinks that Bowling isn't a sport, they should try to enter a tournament where they can potentially bowl 96 games over the course of a week. Not only is it athletic, but it is mental. You're competing with yourself, as well as other people in mastering the conditions on the lanes at the alley.
MacNut said:
Not all hockey is played on ice.
as far as the subject goes.. In general, outside of track/field, if you have an object (ball, puck, person, etc.) that can be hit, thrown, kicked, tossed, or tackled, it's a sport. With that in mind, IMHO, the following are not sports:
Fishing.
Poker.
Cheerleading.
World's Strongest Man.
Eating.
Bodybuilding.
Hunting.
quadG5guy said:
This would be the only reason why auto racing is up for debate.
BL.
OP, I don't think you have any experience in auto racing what so ever. You really should try it before you say it's like sitting in traffic. You remind me of PC users bashing Macs but have never used one before. :|
Hunting and fishing. Anything that involves the act of killing should, in no way, be considered a sport.
I think you later posters who are defending auto-racing didn't bother to read much of the thread beyond the first post.
Several posters have made it clear that auto racing is a dangerous, draining, physically demanding activity that requires a certain level of fitness and a certain amount of skill and involves competing against others in measured competitions.
Now will you allow me the freedom to say I don't consider it a sport?
Unless the car is the one getting the trophy (to paraphrase someone's earlier remarks about horse racing), I don't think auto racing is a sport, and none of the arguments defending it in this thread have made me reconsider that in even the slightest.
I think it comes down to this, for me: I can certainly accept sports that require just the human body (running, though even that benefits from the proper footwear and clothing) or those that can be done with simple tools (basketball - a rim and a ball) or even those that become more competitive as technology progresses and more money is spent on better equipment (golf and better clubs, hockey and better skates and sticks) but I cannot consider something that relies so much on a manufactured machine a sport.
But you didn't say that in your OP. You said
and that's what I called ignorant (it is). Your new post is a more reasonable argument (although I still completely disagree).
I also said:
Of Fishing: "Sitting in a boat with a six pack..."
Of Poker: "Sitting on your rear smoking cigars..."
Of Golf: "...walking around and drinking Iced Tea"
Yet the people who took offensive at my obviously playful comments were exclusively racing fans.
Then again, I can see how they'd be so sensitive, trying to defend something that clearly isn't a sport!
The point you make about the car getting the trophy is one of the most stupid things i have heard on MR. I agree to a point that having a better car will make you better at the sport but its essentially the same for every sport/game around. Imagine lining 20 cars on race track with out drivers, would the cars still race???
Do you think that hockey sticks win hockey games or the people holding them? Do you think that cricket bats score runs or the batters using them?
Do you think that the rowing boat deserves to win or the people actually doing the rowing.
Having better equipment does not make someone instantly good at sport.
However you are free to believe what ever you want regardless of the lack of real justification....
Do you think that hockey sticks win hockey games or the people holding them? Do you think that cricket bats score runs or the batters using them?
Do you think that the rowing boat deserves to win or the people actually doing the rowing.
Having better equipment does not make someone instantly good at sport.
However you are free to believe what ever you want regardless of the lack of real justification....
and that's not always even true.
I am better and faster on the track with my MINI John Cooper Works than I was with my M3. In the case of the M3, it had so much power and handling it was hiding some of my deficiencies. By having somewhat "less" equipment I've been able to hone my skills. Last time I was at the track I used my MINI to lap and double lap M3s while I played cat and mouse with an Acura NSX. If I went back to my M3 now I would probably be faster again, but only because I used a slower car to help me develop into a faster driver.
A lot of novices come to the track with cars they have performance enhanced thinking they'll be soooo fast, but they end up driving slow and sloppy because they don't know how to manage and learn from what they have. They would have been better off and faster with a car left bone stock.