No Right Answer: Is Gaming A Sport?

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

Is gaming a sport? yes. Is gaming an athletic sport? No. Is racing a sport? Yes and it is called Motorsports. Is racing an athletic sport? No.

Just because athletic ability is not involved does not mean it cannot be a sport, only dumb jocks view the word sport to mean athletics only.

You've never seen what it takes to do motocross then... because not any fatass can hop on a dirt bike and win, let alone even place. Same with NASCAR you've got to be in good shape to race in almost any forum. It takes a form of athleticism and stamina to race, so yes it IS an athletic sport. Endurance is a part of athleticism. Sorry bud.

I'm not a huge fan of motorsports, but I'm not about to claim they don't take athletic ability because they sure as hell do.

 

[Lightknight]

Is gaming a sport? yes. Is gaming an athletic sport? No. Is racing a sport? Yes and it is called Motorsports. Is racing an athletic sport? No.

Just because athletic ability is not involved does not mean it cannot be a sport, only dumb jocks view the word sport to mean athletics only.

You've never seen what it takes to do motocross then... because not any fatass can hop on a dirt bike and win, let alone even place. Same with NASCAR you've got to be in good shape to race in almost any forum. It takes a form of athleticism and stamina to race, so yes it IS an athletic sport. Endurance is a part of athleticism. Sorry bud.

I'm not a huge fan of motorsports, but I'm not about to claim they don't take athletic ability because they sure as hell do.

Let's not group all of motorsports together. I would consider dirt bike racing to be a ton more athletically demanding than NASCAR:
http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--20yz76nB--/18th1qrwu7chkjpg.jpg

It's a nice sentiment to think that racing a car requires athletic prowess, but no. NASCAR takes reaction time and coordination. Many of these people would likely be decent at competitive video games too.

What's interesting is that being "fat" doesn't seem to preclude you from commonly accepted sports. Like baseball. From Babe Ruth to more modern players like Ruben Quevedo:

http://rotq.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/ruben-quevedo8.jpg

When John Kruk (another baseball player) was confronted about his weight he said, "Lady, I'm not an athlete I'm a baseball player".

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f115/motokid40/suspensionsworkinggood.jpg

That's Weston Peick in one of his heavier moments. 5'11' and over 200 lbs. Here he is again, still over 200 lbs and he's number 43 (on a stock bike no less):

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/_2Af0JUYWOrY/TY6_oyyfBFI/AAAAAAAADEY/Xc7Iq373gg0/s800/BEF91JL7DBlG.jpg

The truth of the matter is that racing is a public relations and marketing sport. Companies financially back these guys and consider them their PR agents. They don't want fat or ugly or whatever, but they do want to win more. So it means if someone is exceptionally skilled then they can work their way into the national spot like Peick did even if they're heavier than the expected bike racer. But it's incredibly rare. Peick is a bit fortunate in that his weight doesn't show in his face and 200 lbs is a fair bit shy of getting into the "DAAAAaaaamn" category. But it is well known that seeing him race is like seeing a jockey that's a bit too big for the sport win. If you're a big company, do you want to invest in the overweight one or the ones that are performing well and look good? It's the same question movie casting directors are thinking when they look at actors.

Even so, I do feel like dirt bike racing is a whole lot more athletic than most other motorsports.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Eh. More outcries for gaming to become "legitimate".

Are video games "legitimate" sports?
I dunno, because my concerns about what makes a "legit" sport or not long flew away with the realization that the only people that truly give a damn are either owners of large broadcast companies, or elitist assholes. (not mutually exclusive)

Besides, we live in a world where Curling has actual Gold, Silver, and Bronze medals awarded at the Winter Olympics.
Not as a joke. Actual. Medals.
Just like all the other "legitimate" competitions.

It's probably best not to get too upset over this sort of thing.

Gaming is a sport, and I hate it for what it did to League of Legends. Part of the lore retcon was because esports money became too appealing for Riot Games and they decided to abandon the lore tot promote their esports league.

I'm stunned they didn't just ignore the lore entirely after they started raking in the esports dollars.

 

[Kenjitsuka]

It's not a sport. Maybe a JOB for some.
Anyway, who care's about what's just in a name?
A rose by any other name etc...

What *I* care about are those super special anouncements!!!
I hope it's all good news!!! (Like Drinking Games coming back to crush it's enemies, to see them driven before it's splendor, and to solicit the joyful squeeling of many happy women. Just like Conan does it!)

People love the Drinking Games! Maybe it's "Drinking Games: The Next Generation", since all of us have infants now. (It's not, that would be horrible)

Think I just might have to rewatch some of those classic gems now!
Drinking games - Marvel vs Caprum with all it's bare chested glory?
Drinking games mario frat party?

 

[Tono Makt]

Is poker a sport? Is chess a sport?

The answer to those questions is the same as to whether gaming is a sport...

No and technically Yes, though I'd argue that it should be No and No.

I think the whole idea of "Games are Sport!" is an offshoot of an inferiority complex that many of us in the Gaming community have when it comes to sports. A fair number of gamers[footnote]Normally I'd count myself among this number... but I was a pretty decent athlete before I found gaming. I'm still fairly athletic, though the wear and tear of 30+ years of hockey and soccer have wrecked my knees.[/footnote] were terrible athletes, either being clumsy, uncoordinated, weak, fat, having physical issues like asthma at the mild end to outright disabilities that barred them from any sort of sporting activity at all. And I'd wager that many of those gamers were picked on by bullies who were athletes, so by declaring games to be "sport", they can justify saying that they're better "athletes" than the people who bullied them because those bullies aren't as good at (insert game being played for sport here).

That doesn't mean Games shouldn't be played professionally, nor does it denigrate the skill that most games require. Only that we need to determine a more appropriate term for it rather than to try to lump professional Starcraft players in with the Micheal Jordans, Wayne Gretzky's and Usain Bolts of the world.

Personally I'd say that we should just use the term Gamer. Pro Gamer, Semi-Pro Gamer, Amateur Gamer, etc. It's already around, it already has most of the meaning we need for it - a person who is passionate about games and generally quite skilled at games.

 

[hermes]

Is poker a sport? Is chess a sport?

The answer to those questions is the same as to whether gaming is a sport...

No and technically Yes, though I'd argue that it should be No and No.

I think the whole idea of "Games are Sport!" is an offshoot of an inferiority complex that many of us in the Gaming community have when it comes to sports. A fair number of gamers[footnote]Normally I'd count myself among this number... but I was a pretty decent athlete before I found gaming. I'm still fairly athletic, though the wear and tear of 30+ years of hockey and soccer have wrecked my knees.[/footnote] were terrible athletes, either being clumsy, uncoordinated, weak, fat, having physical issues like asthma at the mild end to outright disabilities that barred them from any sort of sporting activity at all. And I'd wager that many of those gamers were picked on by bullies who were athletes, so by declaring games to be "sport", they can justify saying that they're better "athletes" than the people who bullied them because those bullies aren't as good at (insert game being played for sport here).

That doesn't mean Games shouldn't be played professionally, nor does it denigrate the skill that most games require. Only that we need to determine a more appropriate term for it rather than to try to lump professional Starcraft players in with the Micheal Jordans, Wayne Gretzky's and Usain Bolts of the world.

Personally I'd say that we should just use the term Gamer. Pro Gamer, Semi-Pro Gamer, Amateur Gamer, etc. It's already around, it already has most of the meaning we need for it - a person who is passionate about games and generally quite skilled at games.

Why is one "No" and the other "Technically Yes"?

Because I think the same argument that can be used to say chess is a sport, can be applied to say some (not all) games are sports too.

The "games as sport" movement is nothing but a shady marketing strategy. TV executives want to justify it as a sport because it makes for cheap content, and it attracts a demography that is (usually) not interested in sports channels; videogames executives want to justify it as a sport because it gives them some credibility, and it attracts a demography that is (usually) not interested in games; some gamers want to justify it as a sport because it makes them uncomfortable to think it is only a pastime. In the end, it is just a commercially motivated move.

Because of that, I have no interest in whether it is or it is not a sport, but if we are going to stop on technicalities and semantics, I believe (some) games use similar sets of skills as chess and poker, so they should be included in the same categorization.

 

[Tono Makt]

Is poker a sport? Is chess a sport?

The answer to those questions is the same as to whether gaming is a sport...

No and technically Yes, though I'd argue that it should be No and No.

I think the whole idea of "Games are Sport!" is an offshoot of an inferiority complex that many of us in the Gaming community have when it comes to sports. A fair number of gamers[footnote]Normally I'd count myself among this number... but I was a pretty decent athlete before I found gaming. I'm still fairly athletic, though the wear and tear of 30+ years of hockey and soccer have wrecked my knees.[/footnote] were terrible athletes, either being clumsy, uncoordinated, weak, fat, having physical issues like asthma at the mild end to outright disabilities that barred them from any sort of sporting activity at all. And I'd wager that many of those gamers were picked on by bullies who were athletes, so by declaring games to be "sport", they can justify saying that they're better "athletes" than the people who bullied them because those bullies aren't as good at (insert game being played for sport here).

That doesn't mean Games shouldn't be played professionally, nor does it denigrate the skill that most games require. Only that we need to determine a more appropriate term for it rather than to try to lump professional Starcraft players in with the Micheal Jordans, Wayne Gretzky's and Usain Bolts of the world.

Personally I'd say that we should just use the term Gamer. Pro Gamer, Semi-Pro Gamer, Amateur Gamer, etc. It's already around, it already has most of the meaning we need for it - a person who is passionate about games and generally quite skilled at games.

Why is one "No" and the other "Technically Yes"?

Because I think the same argument that can be used to say chess is a sport, can be applied to say some (not all) games are sports too.

Links got posted above to where the IOC or some other international sporting body has declared that Chess is a sport, so technically Chess is a sport.

The "games as sport" movement is nothing but a shady marketing strategy. TV executives want to justify it as a sport because it makes for cheap content, and it attracts a demography that is (usually) not interested in sports channels; videogames executives want to justify it as a sport because it gives them some credibility, and it attracts a demography that is (usually) not interested in games; some gamers want to justify it as a sport because it makes them uncomfortable to think it is only a pastime. In the end, it is just a commercially motivated move.

Because of that, I have no interest in whether it is or it is not a sport, but if we are going to stop on technicalities and semantics, I believe (some) games use similar sets of skills as chess and poker, so they should be included in the same categorization.

No disagreement with anything posted here - that could very well be a large part of the movement to make video games a "sport". I've got 999 channels on my PVR box right now, with about 400 of them being duplicates. I'm sure my cable provider would love to be able to sell me a "Gaming" package and bump a few of those duplicate channels off of the package - not like I'd lose the channel, after all.