« etiquette | Main | spring is springing »

March 23, 2004

to sport or not to sport

this is a discussion i have had many times in the last year or so. i am hoping that this post will put it to rest. what is the definition of a sport? well dictionary.com says:

sport (spôrt, sp rt) n.
1. Physical activity that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often engaged in competitively.
2. An activity involving physical exertion and skill that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often undertaken competitively.
3. An active pastime; recreation.

the argument has been that skiing, hunting, fishing, golf are non sports. we are not talking about the bassmasters classic or PGA or Olympic downhill, we are talking about weekend warriors. just because there is no ball, no ref, or no teams does not mean that it is not a sport. what does this mean? it means that i can now classify myself as a "sports guy", thus putting years of male stereotyping behind me. so from now on i can walk up to a group of people "talking sports", hold my head high, and tell them about the "point spread" of the buck i shot 5 years ago.

Posted by Brandon at 04:38 PM

Comments

don't forget to throw nascar and bowling in the mix w/ the 'non-sports'.

I would say that golf is a sport, it's competitive, it take physical exertion and there are a ton of variables.

But I think that raises another interesting debate, I don't think that b/c you participate in said 'sport' are you deemed an athlete.

Sticking with golf, you can be an over the hill, overweight guy with an artifical hip and still hit a golf ball far and straight. Simply meaning you have a highly developed skill, but considered an athlete? no! (I will say that Tiger is an athlete but he's the exception that PROVES the rule!)

Posted by: jz on March 24, 2004 12:34 PM

i do not consider myself an athlete any more than someone that plays basketball, soccer, or football for recreation. i would go out on a limb and say that anyone who plays "recreational sports" is not considered an athelete, no matter the activity.

as for NASCAR, i whole heartedly believe that is a sport and that the drivers are infact athletes. the amount of mental skill required along with the physical endurance of driving 500 miles at 200 mph demands respect.

Posted by: tre' duece on March 24, 2004 12:54 PM

Ok then, how about I drive around I-495, with the windows closed, and no air-conditioning. I'll wear a racing suit and a helmet so I'll work up a sweat. Then I'll go 150 mph, I'll make a couple of turns to keep it exciting and I'll do that for a couple of hours.

The problem I have with NASCAR is that the car is doing all th work. A great driver in a shitty car is not winning. You have to have the fast car. I'll admit that some drivers are better than others, but if I'm the best driver and I'm driving a Cavalier and the other guy is driving a Corvette, I am not going to pass him no matter how great I am. If you've got the fast car, you are going to win, and it's as simple as that.

Posted by: jz on March 24, 2004 12:59 PM

I 100% think that someone who 'recreationally' participates in an athletic sport is just as much an athlete as the guy who gets paid to do it. He might not be as good..but an athlete none the less.

Posted by: jz on March 24, 2004 01:02 PM