Repeal Title IX

[couch 'em]

Nothing judged subjectively is truly a sport. But if other competitions like gymnastics and equestrian get lumped in with actual sports cheerleading could be to.

That isn't to say it SHOULD be a sport, much like band, competition has ruined what cheerleading is supposed to be

[SMU2007]

Nothing judged subjectively is truly a sport.

Boxing?

[couch 'em]

Nothing judged subjectively is truly a sport.

Boxing?

I think there is a fundamental difference between judging in boxing and judging in, say, gymnastics.

Judges in boxing (or any combat sport) are a necessary evil that is supplemental to the primary means of winning - the knockout. It isa way to have over time to determine a winnerwhen the nature of boxing prevents OT. I think everyone would prefer no fight go to the judges, and you can have this hopes because judges are what happen when the fight doesn't end in the primary knockout method.

All refereeing is subjective, but a part of, not the basis of, determining the winner. In gymnastics etc., subjective judging/refing is the WHOLE basis of determining a winner. It is the basis of the competition like all other art competition.

[ponyboy]

Nothing judged subjectively is truly a sport.

Sure it is. Here's a very safe definition:

An activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others.

You can get into arguments about *how much* physical exertion and/or skill is required. Golf is a classic example of a borderline sport -- lots of skill, about as much physical exertion as grocery shopping. But what's clear is that football, basketball, softball, track and field, gymnastics, volleyball, wrestling are sports.

I'd argue that physical exertion is the most important thing. Skill isn't nearly as important in determining whether something is a sport, though in most sports it's vital if one wants to have any chance of competing. But he's still competing in a sport.

For an example of a sport that requires little skill, I don't think anyone would argue that an untrained sprinter who entered a meet and won would be not be participating in a sport. He'd be exerting himself physically but would not have much in the way of skill.

[couch 'em]

Nothing judged subjectively is truly a sport.

Sure it is. Here's a very safe definition:

An activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others.

You can get into arguments about *how much* physical exertion and/or skill is required. Golf is a classic example of a borderline sport -- lots of skill, about as much physical exertion as grocery shopping. But what's clear is that football, basketball, softball, track and field, gymnastics, volleyball, wrestling are sports.

I'd argue that physical exertion is the most important thing. Skill isn't nearly as important in determining whether something is a sport, though in most sports it's vital if one wants to have any chance of competing. But he's still competing in a sport.

For an example of a sport that requires little skill, I don't think anyone would argue that an untrained sprinter who entered a meet and won would be not be participating in a sport. He'd be exerting himself physically but would not have much in the way of skill.

The dictionary definition is pretty unhelpful here since we are really discussing what qualifies as a sport from a more vernacular perspective. No argument on what qualifies by the book definition.

I have to disagree with you on sprinters however. There is a lot of skill involved. If may be natural skill, much like how an untrained athlete may be naturally skilled at being a running back or at swinging a baseball bat. Look at Margus also.

I have come to the conclusion that the "physical" requirement of a sport has to be thought of as applying to things that would be described in terms such as strength, speed, balance, finesse. Applying the body. This would keep golf in and chess out. It also lets in darts, pool, and bowling while excluding poker. I am Okay with this.

I still think judged events have to stay out. You let in cheer and gymnastics you have to let in dancing as a sport. It's twerking a sport?

[ponyboy]

Be a good argument over a beer or two.

[couch 'em]

Agreed

[Digetydog]

Nothing judged subjectively is truly a sport.

Boxing?

Boxing judging is totally objective. If you pay the judge the most, he objectively decides that you won.

[Digetydog]

Nothing judged subjectively is truly a sport.

Sure it is. Here's a very safe definition:

An activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others.

You can get into arguments about *how much* physical exertion and/or skill is required. Golf is a classic example of a borderline sport -- lots of skill, about as much physical exertion as grocery shopping. But what's clear is that football, basketball, softball, track and field, gymnastics, volleyball, wrestling are sports.

I'd argue that physical exertion is the most important thing. Skill isn't nearly as important in determining whether something is a sport, though in most sports it's vital if one wants to have any chance of competing. But he's still competing in a sport.

For an example of a sport that requires little skill, I don't think anyone would argue that an untrained sprinter who entered a meet and won would be not be participating in a sport. He'd be exerting himself physically but would not have much in the way of skill.

If exertion is critical to sports, is baseball a sport?

Carrying my clubs 18 holes (in Texas heat) was much more work than playing baseball ever was.

[ponyboy]

You ever sprint in golf? Dive? Block the green like a catcher blocks home plate?

[couch 'em]

Cricket.

Surely a sport. Not very "athletic".