hedwards: So swimming isn't a sport? People can't usually swim professionally, they have to have some sort of a job to pay for the pool access and whatnot. Same goes for running, people don't generally get paid to run, even at elite levels. I don't think those are any less sports than things like soccer and hockey where people do get paid to play.
And even when people are being paid to play, it's a tiny portion of the people engaging in the sport that see actual monetary reward.
MarioFanaticXV: You've done some pretty blatant trolling in the past, but this honestly takes the cake. You've never seen anyone do professional swimming or running? I guess you've never heard of the Olympics, unless you think that they're all just doing it as nothing more than a mere hobby, and they don't worry about it much when the Olympics aren't in session?
LOL, you're one to talk. BTW, how much credibility does the IOC have left after they let Russia have the Olympics recently? Russia has a terrible human rights record and it's getting worse.
Say what you want about me, I'm grumpy and a bit of a curmudgeon, but I'm not generally wrong.
tinyE: I think we have a simple misunderstanding, professionally means they get paid to do it, nothing more, nothing less. Olympians don't get paid. In fact, 99% of the athletes in the world are not professional.
MarioFanaticXV: Words have multiple meanings, and it's long past the day where being "professional" only meant you get paid to do something.
http://trackandfieldathletesassociation.org/site/how-much-money-do-track-and-field-athletes-make/
http://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/life-as-a-professional-swimmer/
You might want to reread my post champ. The only trolling I see going on in this thread is by you.
hedwards: I do that at work, but I wouldn't say that teaching is a sport. I really think people are trying really hard to bend the definition of sport to include every competitive activity without considering the consequences.
HereForTheBeer: That's where I'm at on a bunch of the 'definitions' presented in the thread. The criteria from SportAccord describe aspects of my job which, while it does have a strenuous physical aspect at times, is in no way a sport. And at times it IS fun, which is also part of the point of sports and games. I get spectators: production managers breathing down my neck, wondering when I'm going to be finished. And cheering when the job is done though, sadly, no hot cheerleaders to swoon over me. I even get 'away games' - remote service visits.
I'll go back to my 'element of danger' bit as part of the definition, and I'm not including Deep Vein Thrombosis as a qualifier. ; )
What I really don't get is why things like Chess and Poker and Starcraft need to be sports in order to be legitimate. Seems to me that rather than trying to join the jocks, people ought to be focused on removing the stigmatism from gaming.
Nobody with any sense is going to suggest that there isn't a lot of pressure or that being in shape isn't going to help one compete, but it's stretching the definition of sports a bit too far to include things where there is not actual physical activity like some folks in here want to do.
tinyE: Good, call one of the original and most respected members of the forum a troll. This should work out just fine. XD
I rarely if ever agree with him myself but some places you just don't go.
Thanks. Don't get me wrong, I am a curmudgeon, but despite some people's opinions, I am usually right or at least on to something.
Except when somebody like Mario gets on my nerves. Sometimes I do get a bit kitten with a mouse.
