Once again, in order to be a SPORT, you must be able to answer YES to at least 2 of these 3 questions:

theJeff wrote:

Once again, in order to be a sport, you must be able to answer YES to at least 2 of these 3 questions:

1. Does the human do most of the work?

2. Can competitors actively and physically play defense?

3. Is the ultimate outcome objectively decided by the competitors themselves (and not by judges)?

Examples: Running: yes, no (arguable), yes = sport

Nascar: no, no (arguable for the same reason as above), yes = not a sport

Gymnastics: yes, no, no = not a sport

Football, soccer, basketball, etc: yes, yes, yes = sport

Come at me.

I don’t watch NASCAR but I know you are vastly underestimating it.

And One wrote:

asdghj wrote:

There is a heck of a lot more acceleration involved in driving a golf ball 350 yards than there is in distance running.

What part of "entire human body" are you having a hard time understanding?

Almost the entire human body is displaced rapidly in a golf swing except for perhaps the feet & head

'2. Can competitors actively and physically play defense?'

What nonsense is this?

theJeff wrote:

ex-runner wrote:

Darts and snooker are sports, but Olympic weightlifting isn't....

Weightlifting is. I assume you are referring to judges? Yes, judges play a part - in the same sense that they play a part in football - but the competition is still objectively decided by the competitors themselves.

Counting a lift in weight lifting is objective eg what is a straight arm etc, Gymnastics is no different you just don't know the rules

You can't play football without a ball you can run with no equipment

No Pulitzer for You wrote:

Once again, you post the same thread twice even though you co-own the website and should do better. Come on, Rojo...do you want to live in Weldon’s shadow forever?

Some say it is impossible to see Rojo and TheJeff together in the same room. TheJeff knows too much about weight lifting and details of college American football to be Rojo. I don't think they're the same guy.

LRC doofuses wrote:

Was the point of this thread to show that running is not a sport?

“an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment.”

Running does not involve skill. Toddlers run as soon as they start to walk.

Yeah, and toddlers can also throw a football, swing a bat, catch a ball. But they don't do it well. Your point is invalid.

Star wrote:

That car ain’t driving itself.

And you can’t win if you are not physically fit.

Maybe today. But, for several years, the winners didn't really need to be physically fit. in the 60's and 70's these guys couldn't do a sit up on a bet.

For the OP, Gymnastics is full of people who are more athletic than 99.9999% of every single long distance runner in the world. I have been a distance runner since the late 70's and I have had moderate success. There is no way I ever considered myself an athlete. In order of real athletes:

1- (college and pro levels only) ice hockey

2- (skilled positions only) college and pro basketball

3- College and Olympic level gymnasts

4- College and Olympic level water polo players

5- College and pro level rugby players

6- HS and up, skilled position players only, - football.

7- HS and up, skilled positions only - Soccer

8- Olympic level only - badminton

9- Olympic level only - ping pong

10 - College level and up - volleyball

You are welcome.

Some say ... wrote:

No Pulitzer for You wrote:

Once again, you post the same thread twice even though you co-own the website and should do better. Come on, Rojo...do you want to live in Weldon’s shadow forever?

Some say it is impossible to see Rojo and TheJeff together in the same room. TheJeff knows too much about weight lifting and details of college American football to be Rojo. I don't think they're the same guy.

One has a journalism degree. The other can write.

ex-runner wrote:

theJeff wrote:

Weightlifting is. I assume you are referring to judges? Yes, judges play a part - in the same sense that they play a part in football - but the competition is still objectively decided by the competitors themselves.

It literally isn't. The judges determine what counts as a lift and tell the competitors when they can stop lifting the weight. You have several judges because the result of a lift is open to interpretation and opinion, like gymnastics.

Without judges you simply cannot have a competition.

So weightlifting only satisfies 1 of the 3 'requirements'

No. Lifting a weight and scoring a goal can be objectively identified. Of course there are rules, but the act itself is objective.

Swimming and diving, on the other hand, are subjectively decided by judges. Imagine a wide receiver only being awarded 4 points for a touchdown because he bobbled the pass before securing the catch. Or a runner being docked a few seconds because of ugly form. THAT is the diving/gymnastics equivalent.

Why do multiple judges not award the same score? Subjectivity.

Quidditch - yes, yes, yes = sport.

Baby Super Bowl Champ wrote:

LRC doofuses wrote:

Was the point of this thread to show that running is not a sport?

“an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment.”

Running does not involve skill. Toddlers run as soon as they start to walk.

Yeah, and toddlers can also throw a football, swing a bat, catch a ball. But they don't do it well. Your point is invalid.

His point was that running doesn’t require skill. Hitting a ball with a bat and catching or throwing a football require skill. Running requires speed not skill. However running pits people in age groups. Therefore you have high school, college, and age groups beyond that. Include diaper derbies and you have toddlers competing. Running really is not a sport.