Slashdot Mirror


Should Video Games Be In the Olympics?

An anonymous reader writes: The BBC is running a story about e-sports and competitive video game. It's based on comments from Rob Pardo, formerly of Blizzard Entertainment, who says there's a good argument for having e-sports in the Olympics. He says video games are well positioned to be a spectator sport — an opinion supported by Amazon's purchase of Twitch.tv for almost a billion dollars. The main obstacle, says Pardo, is getting people to accept video games as a legitimate sport. "If you want to define sport as something that takes a lot of physical exertion, then it's hard to argue that videogames should be a sport, but at the same time, when I'm looking at things that are already in the Olympics, I start questioning the definition." The article notes, "Take chess, for instance. Supporters of the game have long called for its inclusion the Games, but the IOC has been reluctant, considering it a 'mind sport' and therefore not welcome in the Games." So, should the Games expand to include "mind sports" and video games?

232 comments

  1. One word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    NO

    Don't need the IOC corrupting my hobby, plus how would you even chose which game was in the Olympics?

    1. Re:One word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah IOC is totally the problem and would corrupt the snow-white pillar of honesty and good sportsmanship that is modern gaming.

      If it's not sports, it doesn't belong in the Olympic games. e-"sports" is not sports. It's a circus.

    2. Re:One word by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2

      The last thing we need is the IOC banning caffeine as a performance enhancement drug.

    3. Re:One word by stephanruby · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...plus how would you even chose which game was in the Olympics?

      The same way it's currently done now, with both bribes and sponsorship money.

      In any case, I agree with you. If video game studios want their own competitions, they should just organize their own leagues.

    4. Re:One word by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

      Olympics were historically all about finding the best guys and girls to be soldiers and as such promote enrolment in the forces. (hence the "physical" only aspect).

    5. Re:One word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remove non-sports like wrestling, running, javelin toss, hammer throw, shot put, archery, etc. Make way for real sports like Starcraft (TM).

    6. Re:One word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The last thing we need is the IOC banning caffeine as a performance enhancement drug.

      This! I am doping right this very moment!

      AND I AM NOT SORRY!

    7. Re:One word by ArcadeNut · · Score: 1

      NO

      how would you even chose which game was in the Olympics?

      That's easy....

      For the Summer Games:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
      and
      http://www.arcade-museum.com/g...

      For the Winter Games:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W...
      and
      http://www.arcade-museum.com/g...

      --
      Visit the Arcade Restoration Workshop @ http://www.arcaderestoration.com
    8. Re:One word by Cyfun · · Score: 1

      Considering table tennis is already an olympic sport, perhaps we should start with Pong.

      --
      In Soviet Russia, dot slashes YOU!
    9. Re:One word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever is the equivalent of Quake 2 or Halo nowadays, use that game.

      Thanks for changing my mind from "you've gotta freakin' be kidding me, shouldn't competitive sports involve somebody who has set foot in a gym?" to "Yesssss!"

    10. Re:One word by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      AND I AM NOT SORRY!

      The Lance Armstrong Defense.

    11. Re:One word by Adriax · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it would be clowns doing the announcing for that. "And xXx_L33T_MSTR_PWNS_UR_M0M_xXx finishes his final round of Duck Hunt with a 360 Noscope Eyes Closed Backflip, downing the last duck and sticking the landing! Now we go to the judges.... PWN, PWN, L33T, PWN, and a Tryhard. One L33T, 3 PWNs, and one Tryhard for an average score of PWN. Which is enough for xXx_L33T_MSTR_PWNS_UR_M0M_xXx to take the gold for Canada, edging ==KILLA_KLOWN_KENNY== from USA down to silver and Sven96 from France to bronze."

      --
      I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
    12. Re:One word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They just want to dive in to the Olympic-sized pools of money.

    13. Re:One word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chess is about as much of a sport as is poker. Stupid nerds (I'm a geek) need to get outside once in a while.

    14. Re:One word by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Duke Nukem because BFG.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    15. Re:One word by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Huh? I guess that's true if you go back to the ancient greek Olympics (although the winners would rarely actually join the army). The modern olympics had competitions including poetry and sculpture when it began.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    16. Re:One word by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Surely we should start with ping and then add Pong?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  2. I'm Gonna Say "Yes" by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Funny

    If only to watch the IOCs' heads explode when the suggestion is put forth.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:I'm Gonna Say "Yes" by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      I'm going to say "Yes" because adding yet another boring "spectator sport" will help eventually end that money-grubbing fiasco called the IOC.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    2. Re:I'm Gonna Say "Yes" by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It may not happen; the modern Olympics, quite unlike the ancient Olympics, have not always been purely about physical sports. Competitions like poetry and painting were removed in part because the same entrants won year after year—this has not, so far, been an issue for e-sports.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
    3. Re:I'm Gonna Say "Yes" by pkinetics · · Score: 2
      Nope. They'll just figure out a way to inject Olympic ads and crap into your game as part of your DLC.

      So you will PAY them money to watch their ads.

    4. Re:I'm Gonna Say "Yes" by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      If that doesn't get them, we can suggest that they included "Twerking" in a future Olympics! Sooner or later I'm gonna see those guys' heads explode!

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    5. Re:I'm Gonna Say "Yes" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, at the ancient games (the Olympian, Nemean, Pythian, and Isthmian) poetry and rhetoric were very much part of the milieu. Pindar's odes are categorized into books depending on what games they celebrated; the Iliad and Odyssey were sung at the less-important Panathenaic games. Physical competition was only part of the competitive nature of the games, but excellence in any field was contestable among the aristocrats of ancient Greece. Really, the games were just about aristocrats hobnobbing internationally (each city in Greece was a separate nation) and demonstrating their wealth. The conspicuous consumption aspect hasn't changed since antiquity.

    6. Re:I'm Gonna Say "Yes" by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Well, that would be the exact reason why to say no, the main video gamers are participant orientated and little bit of viewing is more than enough. It is the failed jock strap douche's that watch sports, hour after, boring hour, after oh my super boring hour and they are not bored at all, just deluding themselves that they are on the field ie computer games can of course right there and then enter their field. Also in the real world PvP is not so much player versus player but purse vs purse. The greed balance of selling virtual junk for real currency versus allowing people to win for free. Let people win for free instead of admins logging on with powered up characters kicking those cheap bastards arses who are not spending enough.

      Perhaps they should be looking at the Olympics from the other point of view, should they either just stop or end the lies about amateurs or simply stop lying and make it all professional.

      The internet delivered a great thing for most geeks and nerds, the opportunity to escape sports broadcasting and the advertising associated with it.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    7. Re:I'm Gonna Say "Yes" by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      It hasn't been "amateur" for a long time. Almost all participants get subsidies from various organizations (like pros get paid), there's doping (same as pro sports), there's the "whoever has the most money to spend getting their teams up to par will be very competitive (same as the pro teams), there's allowing professional players to compete (for example, hockey allowing NHL, EHL, and KHL players to play).

      I've been boycotting the olympics for decades. However, I will cop to watching the Canada-US semi-final and the Canada-Sweden final in hockey, and I never watch hockey, not even the playoffs. Those two games were intense, probably because of the teams were composed of professional players.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    8. Re:I'm Gonna Say "Yes" by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

      I feel like I should've known that. Thanks for the correction.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  3. Rifle-shooting is a sport in the olympics... by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

    ...so why not "virtual" shooting?

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    1. Re:Rifle-shooting is a sport in the olympics... by CastrTroy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If video games go into the Olympics, there's a lot of other things that have to make it in there first like darts and snooker. While video games are a good form of competition between people, I don't think that they are a good fit for the Olympics.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:Rifle-shooting is a sport in the olympics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If video games to into the Olympics, there's a lot of other things that have to make it in there first, like farts and nookie. While video games are a good form of competition between people, I don't think that they are a good fit for the Olympics.

    3. Re:Rifle-shooting is a sport in the olympics... by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      Yeah when will monopoly and cranium hit the olympics? What games will make the cut, Duck Hunt? SMB 3?

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    4. Re:Rifle-shooting is a sport in the olympics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If video games go into the Olympics, there's a lot of other things that have to make it in there first like darts and snooker. While video games are a good form of competition between people, I don't think that they are a good fit for the Olympics.

      Aren't you supposed to be physically fit to compete in the Olympics, and why we have a separate set of games for people with disabilities, for instance? Give the gamers their own damn Olympics and keep them out of the games that require someone to actually use all of their bodies not just their thumbs.

      My $0.02.

    5. Re:Rifle-shooting is a sport in the olympics... by Cabriel · · Score: 1

      Unlike Darts and Snooker, e-sports like Star Craft drive people to the upper edges of reaction time, and strategic thinking--much like the modern Olympics mostly push people to the upper edges of strength, speed, and agility. If there's going to be a serious argument to allow it, that's the reason that will be the basis for it.

      Disclaimer: I don't believe e-sports should be part of the main Olympics, but if there was a digitally-focused Olympics, or if many e-sports got together to host sort of their own style of the Olympics, I'd be supportive of that.

    6. Re:Rifle-shooting is a sport in the olympics... by Your.Master · · Score: 1

      Snooker can deal with strategic thinking, and both are both driving you up to the upper edges of hand-eye coordination.

      Really, any competition that is not totally random (like a coin-tossing competition) is about driving you to the upper edges of something. Poker would fit. It seems we lack a consistent definition of what the Olympics are about.

  4. Legitamacy by easyTree · · Score: 1

    The main obstacle, says Pardo, is getting people to accept video games as a legitimate sport.

    Not insurmountable - hand out performance-enhancing drugs, bots and hitbox hacks and you've made a good start.

    1. Re:Legitamacy by easyTree · · Score: 1

      I forgot to add, add massive corruption to determine where contests are held and which communities benefit from the flood-plain effect.

  5. They do have one advantage by Cytotoxic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Video games have at least one advantage over many of the Olympic sports: They can have clearly defined objectives and scoring. Many of the Olympic sports don't really qualify in my book because they rely on judges to tell us who was better. Even if they were fully objective in every respect, it still smacks of a beauty contest rather than an athletic competition. If we play a match of FIFA 2015 there will be absolutely no question as to who the winner is.

    I still think it is silly to talk about video games as an olympic sport, but it is also silly that we have sports like ballroom dance and synchronized swimming in the Olympics. My rule of thumb is "if you have to ask someone else to tell you who the winner is; it isn't a sport, it is a recreational activity."

    1. Re:They do have one advantage by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 1

      Boxing (non-KO/TKO). Any sport with line judges. (Was it in, or out?) Any sport with referees. (Was that a foul? Is his shoulder on the mat?) It's only recently with high-speed cameras we can truly objectively declare who won a race. There's a LOT of subjectivity in Olympic sports.

    2. Re:They do have one advantage by Moof123 · · Score: 1

      I agree. Figure skating, ski/snowboard tricks, etc have always irked my sensibilities. I prefer things with measurable times, goals, etc to the other fluff. Regardless of that, the coverage and inane commentary has been fairly off putting above and beyond the choice of the sports themselves.

    3. Re:They do have one advantage by phizi0n · · Score: 2

      If we play a match of FIFA 2015 there will be absolutely no question as to who the winner is.

      Really? What happens if they encounter a bug in the game, especially one previously unknown publicly? What happens if there is a technical problem (mouse stops working, blue screen, fried GPU, etc.)? Even in esports there are circumstances where a person has to make a judgement call. They try their best to reduce those situations with clearly defined rules but when they try to be perfectly strict like KeSPA did in the past then it causes resentment from fans and players alike for being too unreasonable.

    4. Re:They do have one advantage by Solandri · · Score: 1

      If we play a match of FIFA 2015 there will be absolutely no question as to who the winner is.

      You have to be careful to distinguish between competitive sports like athletics or weightlifting, and game sports like football(soccer) or hockey. The former is purely about who is strongest, fastest, whatever on that particular day. The latter deliberately introduces variability ("luck") so that the outcome isn't always the same "best" person/team winning every time - because that would be boring.

      So no, a match of FIFA 2015 wouldn't leave no question as to who the winner was. People would probably pour over the game logs to try to prove how the random number generator happened to favor the winning team on a crucial play.

    5. Re:They do have one advantage by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      There's a LOT of subjectivity in Olympic sports.

      How about walk-racing? The rule is the walker must be in contact with the ground at all times....but slow motion video clearly shows they break the rule with every stride. So now they say "visible to the naked eye." And it's back in the hands of judges who, knowing full well that the walker is losing contact, have to decide if they can actually see it or just "know" it.
      I guess the reason they don't fully enforce it that it would be even less interesting to watch.

    6. Re:They do have one advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There would still be no doubt as to who won the game. Even if the random number generator always favored one day that person would still have won.
      You are talking about 'did the best player win'. Totally different topic.

    7. Re:They do have one advantage by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      we have sports like ballroom dance

      As far as I can find the IOC has only recognized the World DanceSport Federation as the international body governing competitive ballroom dancing. There has been a lot of push to get ballroom dancing in the Olympics but as far as I can find it has never happened. If you can find any references to anyone actually winning a medal in ballroom dancing I would like to see it.

    8. Re:They do have one advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you're talking about is not sport - but the difference between a game, and a competition - (that can both be applied as sports).

    9. Re:They do have one advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd argue that figure skating &c are more objective than hockey, football, handegg and their ilk. Figure skating has a defined set of tricks that need to be performed to reach a certain score. Whether the trick is successfully performed is arguably subjective, but certainly not to a very large extent.
      Meanwhile, in the classic score as many goals as you can sports, referees can arbitrarily choose to pause the match, give the ball to whichever team, send or not send players off the field for things that may or may not be allowed, depending on which angle you looked from (or if you looked at all), stop the match when they feel like it, &c, &c. The number of times I've heard people complain about referees making the wrong decisions in football is roughly the same as the number of times I've heard a discussion about football at all. Meanwhile, the figure skating crowd generally nods and agrees with the judges.

    10. Re:They do have one advantage by Nemyst · · Score: 1

      If bugs were such a major issue, there would be no esports tournaments. There is a significant difference between an unpredictable, exceptional event (technical issue, bug) and something fundamentally tied to a discipline's scoring system (voting for performances). Equating the two is disingenuous at best.

    11. Re:They do have one advantage by dcollins · · Score: 1

      First thing: I came here to say that video games have one significant disadvantage, in that the games (rules, if you like) are not stable; the publishers change them every few years in order to boost the revenue stream. The rules to video games are generally not in the public domain, unlike common sports. They are controlled by a single publisher interest. And the hardware quickly changes and becomes unavailable, too (or at least requires an emulator). So that would be my biggest dispute with video games being a sport -- they're constantly becoming defunct in terms of the rules, platforms, and access.

      Second thing: But let's put that aside and focus on a snapshot of some video game at a particular moment in time. I used to work at Papyrus, publisher of NASCAR Racing for the PC in the 90's, we were developing and negotiating for a real-life NASCAR-sanctioned video racing league, and of course we had an in-house league every week that was very serious. (Most of the principals are still continuing that work at iRacing.com now.) We still needed an after-race adjudication committee to go over replays and make judgements about unsportsmanlike behavior -- who was at fault for a wreck, could one have been avoided, did someone stop-and-go a restart (I remember a huge argument one week about that one), etc. Maybe in some other game you'd establish out-of-the-box rules for behavior like not pulling out the ethernet cable, not flooding the chat box with offensive messages, not shouting verbally in the playing space to confuse other players, etc. You'll never entirely get away from the need for some kind of human judgements on fair play. Frankly that falls in the rather large category of geek fantasies that tech solves all social problems when it doesn't.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    12. Re:They do have one advantage by mutherhacker · · Score: 1

      In the original Greek olympics there were only sports where the definition of victory/defeat was crystal clear (only track and field sports basically). The modern version of the olympics is the one with the judges, and which allows room for ambiguity.

    13. Re:They do have one advantage by schn · · Score: 1

      There's a clear difference between flawed human observation to enforce rules and humans judging as an integral part of scoring.

    14. Re:They do have one advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly, this means that luge is the only true sport. I'd like to see the referees stop that part-way through...

    15. Re:They do have one advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bah. Running is easy to measure - but a running contest is so boring. Figure skating has good looking women - great! Most sports do not; smaller breasts weigh less and that matter too much in any kind of endurance sport.

      Snowboard tricks? Fun if you like the sport - probably boring otherwise. But plenty of objective criteria. 3 flips is better than 2 flips, and so on.

      But who cares - being "in the olympics" or not isn't that important. Plenty of other competitions. The above mentioned snowboarders do not consider the olympics the most important one to win. The IOC accepted them too late - their main event is another one.

    16. Re:They do have one advantage by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      What if an ice skater has a heart attack or a seizure? What if the lights go out at an indoor or nighttime soccer match? OH NOE!

    17. Re:They do have one advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although recognized as an Olympic sport it has never been included in the Olympics (for medals). I don't know what people are complaining about always see dancing at the Olympic games what would the opening ceremony be without it ;-)

  6. Betteridge here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Got any new stories for me?

    1. Re:Betteridge here. by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 4, Funny

      Bennett Haselton is working on one for you right now.

    2. Re: Betteridge here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Surely, you meant "Bennett Haselton is squeezing one out for you right now."?

  7. NO, NO and NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No and neither should Baseball.

  8. NO by Megahard · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Olympics is for sports. Not games. Sport is "activity involving physical exertion and skill" google. And no, pressing keys or buttons doesn't count.

    --
    I eat only the real part of complex carbohydrates.
  9. Re:No by zippthorne · · Score: 2, Informative

    Except that Sailing and Curling are both current olympic sports, Chess is apparently under occasional consideration, and according to wikipedia, even ballooning was once an olympic sport....

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  10. Re: No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not true. The olympics used to include art and poetry.

  11. Something that challenges the body by JoeCommodore · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think some ultimate Dance Dance Revolution would make an interesting olymic event. Singles and in groups.

    --
    "Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
    1. Re:Something that challenges the body by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not just Wii the whole thing and get it over with, then? Stupidest idea ever.

  12. Limit it to actual war fare games by plopez · · Score: 3, Funny

    The origianl games revolved around martial sports; javelin, wrestling, archery, etc. Then came shooting, pentathlon, biathlon etc. So limit it to the games actually used in warfare such as drone strikes, gunship strafing, and the perennial favorite thermo-nuclear war. Though the last one would actually be pretty boring. The players would have to do nothing to compete.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    1. Re:Limit it to actual war fare games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would hacking the other countries' web sites be rewarded or punished?

    2. Re:Limit it to actual war fare games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So limit it to the games actually used in warfare such as drone strikes, gunship strafing, and the perennial favorite thermo-nuclear war. Though the last one would actually be pretty boring. The players would have to do nothing to compete.

      Indeed. The only winning move is not to play.

    3. Re:Limit it to actual war fare games by plopez · · Score: 1

      I'm glad someone got the reference.

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    4. Re:Limit it to actual war fare games by binarylarry · · Score: 1

      Haha yeah I loved starship troopers!

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    5. Re:Limit it to actual war fare games by FooAtWFU · · Score: 2

      the perennial favorite thermo-nuclear war. Though the last one would actually be pretty boring. The players would have to do nothing to compete.

      The real problem with thermonuclear war as Olympic sport? The only way to win is not to play.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    6. Re:Limit it to actual war fare games by Urkki · · Score: 1

      the perennial favorite thermo-nuclear war. Though the last one would actually be pretty boring. The players would have to do nothing to compete.

      The real problem with thermonuclear war as Olympic sport? The only way to win is not to play.

      Not just that. The only way to win is to make sure nobody plays.

      I'm continually amazed how humanity has managed to successfully keep winning this particular game for almost 70 years now! But how long can this winning streak continue?

  13. Doping on Bawls and Mountain Dew? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doping on Bawls and Mountain Dew? Better watch out.

  14. do what you want. by ihtoit · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Olympics lost all meaning when it was decided to admit events for people missing fucking LIMBS into a sporting gala previously for those who were ACTUALLY BETTER THAN AVERAGE! Better, stronger, faster. What the fuck is "dressage", anyway??

    Take my favourite competitive sport: archery. OK, we have the longbow, which is pretty fucking difficult to STRING, never mind DRAW and AIM, but now we have the olympic event where they get to use counterweights, spring cam mechanisms to bring the draw weight down yet maintain nock energy, composite bows and superthin strings, peep sights(!) and drop scales, and the basic event which runs just 33 feet, where it is entirely possible to gain a gold medal. I *PRACTICE* AT NINETY FEET. WITH AN ENGLISH LONGBOW (and the trainer at the club across the river wonders how I don't tear the shit out of my shoulder muscles every week, it's because I've been shooting bow since I was FOUR). I could piss the basic event with my bow on a *bad* day.

    --
    Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    1. Re:do what you want. by Krishnoid · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you, Robin of Locksley, Internet edition.

    2. Re:do what you want. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always wanted to see Acrobatic Ski Jumping for the Blind at the ParaOlympics.

      It may not be a sport but it would be a hell of a lot of fun to watch.

    3. Re:do what you want. by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      Nottingham, actually. I've never been to Locksley.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    4. Re:do what you want. by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'd love to see him post that shit on ArcheryTalk and watch him get laughed out of the building.

      BTW: Compound bows and peeps sights are NOT used in the Olympics; his "33 feet" is just out his arse, Olympics are shot at 70 meters. After that, he just starts talking bullshit.

    5. Re:do what you want. by ihtoit · · Score: 1, Informative

      http://www.olympic.org/photos/...

      ^fucking peep sights.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    6. Re:do what you want. by sdguero · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Hey now! My aunt rode dressage in 2 olympics. One of my earliest memories was seeing her in the opening ceremonies in 1984.

      http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi...
      She was holding the red balloon. :)

      Dressage is defined as "the highest expression of horse training." My aunt dedicated her life to understanding and working with horses. Going to the olympics was an added bonus, awarded to her because she is very good at what she does.

      Horses were largely replaced by the internal combustion engine about 100 years ago. Bows were replaced by firearms nearly 400 years ago. Both are archeaic and underappreciated. Honestly, I was surprised someone who enjoys longbow archery has no respect for dressage. Then I read NoNONAlphaCharsHere's reply and see that pretty much everything in your post is bullshit. So now I'm no longer surprised.

    7. Re:do what you want. by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 3, Informative

      but now we have the olympic event where they get to use counterweights

      Yes. I'm not sure why that's such a big deal...

      spring cam mechanisms

      No; there are no compound bow events at the Olympics. It's all recurve.

      peep sights(!) and drop scales

      Peep sights aren't allowed. I don't know what a drop scale is.

      and the basic event which runs just 33 feet

      No, all four events are at 70 metres. That's 220 feet.

      where it is entirely possible to gain a gold medal.

      Of course it's entirely possible to get a gold medal. The whole point is that there's only one, and someone gets to win it.

      I *PRACTICE* AT NINETY FEET. WITH AN ENGLISH LONGBOW

      Okay,

      (and the trainer at the club across the river wonders how I don't tear the shit out of my shoulder muscles every week, it's because I've been shooting bow since I was FOUR).

      we get it,

      I could piss the basic event with my bow on a *bad* day.

      you're awesome.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    8. Re:do what you want. by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Oh, I see. You don't know what a peep sight is.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    9. Re:do what you want. by PhoenixBurn · · Score: 1

      I cant see a peep sight on that Olympians bow. http://www.peepsights.com/

    10. Re:do what you want. by NoKaOi · · Score: 1

      I could piss the basic event with my bow on a *bad* day.

      Sweet! I assume that, since you're more skilled than everyone else, that you'll be competing in the next olympics? I look forward to hearing about your gold medal!

    11. Re:do what you want. by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 2

      That's not an Olympian, it's a hunter (maybe the camo and gloves would be a clue). If you look, you'll see the two vertical cables between the riser (handle) and the shooter's face. That means it's a COMPOUND bow, which, as I said, aren't used in the Olympics.

    12. Re:do what you want. by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      Might not have been a peep sight, but there was indeed a sighting mechanism.

    13. Re:do what you want. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Um... The picture you linked to doesn't show a peep sight. Could you perhaps circle it and post the image somewhere? I'm interested to know what you think a peep sight it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re:do what you want. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      In Olympic archery the distance to the target is 70m, roughly 70yards, not 33feet (which is 10m/10yards) ... you should have figured yourself that that number could in no way have been correct.
      So your 90 feet is less then half the olympic distance.

      However I agree that shooting with those modern bows is just a joke.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    15. Re:do what you want. by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      However I agree that shooting with those modern bows is just a joke.

      What about the runners with their modern shoes? Or the javelin throwers with their modern javelins?

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    16. Re:do what you want. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd piss on you on a good day.

    17. Re:do what you want. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Nothing with them ... they only run faster/further without hurting their feet and the javeline is o real difference anyway.
      I suggest to try modern olympic bows verus a 'real one' ... same for pistol shooting btw.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    18. Re:do what you want. by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      What's unreal about a recurve bow?

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    19. Re:do what you want. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Nothing about the bow, but stabelizers and aiming aids are.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    20. Re:do what you want. by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      So shoes that allow you to run faster/further without hurting your feet are okay, but stabilisers and a sight to help you shoot straight aren't?

      It's all arbitrary and subjective.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    21. Re:do what you want. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Of course it is subjective.

      However if you don't grasp the difference between better shoes and a bow that is not a bow then you don't qualify for the discussion.

      You could as well say a remote controlled ball, for soccer, golf or tennis is fine ... the player only needs to push it into the general direction and a coach/supervisor directs into the goal/hole.

      Sorry, but a bow with stabelizers and aiming assists has nothing to do with archery ... they could as well use a crossbow.

      Shoot a now and get a clue instead of nitpicking about words.

      Tool A in competition X .... verus
      Tool B in competition Y ... only is similar in grammar ... not in physics.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    22. Re:do what you want. by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Of course it is subjective.

      Then why are you acting so butthurt about a sport that doesn't confirm to what is simply your personal preference?

      However if you don't grasp the difference between better shoes and a bow that is not a bow then you don't qualify for the discussion.

      Oh, so now it's not subjective? And if I disagree with you or fail to understand your point, as I may well have done, I'm beneath contempt? Charming.

      You could as well say a remote controlled ball, for soccer, golf or tennis is fine ...

      You couldn't as well say that at all. There's a huge difference between making a tool easier for an individual to use (where that individual is still the only person influencing the action of the tool), and introducing a secondary influence.

      Sorry, but a bow with stabelizers and aiming assists has nothing to do with archery ...

      The people who run the Olympics disagree, as would the majority of archers, who shoot recurves with sights and stabilisers.

      Shoot a now [what?] and get a clue instead of nitpicking about words.

      I'm nitpicking the attitude that suggests your opinion on this subject is objectively superior to everyone else's (prefacing such a statement with a passive-aggresive "Sorry..." usually being a key indicator). No, I don't expect every statement to be proceeded with "In my opinion" but that's really not the way you're coming across.

      As for nitpicking, if deriding Olympic archery as "not archery" isn't nitpicking, I'm not sure what would qualify.

      Tool A in competition X .... verus
      Tool B in competition Y ... only is similar in grammar ... not in physics.

      Ye-es... not quite sure you're getting at there. Go-karts and Formula One are both motor racing. Olympic archery and longbow/bare-bow archery are both archery.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    23. Re:do what you want. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      The majority of archers shoot bows like:
      Yumi
      Long bow, british
      Recurve hunting bows
      Skyth bows
      Hungarian bows
      Korean bows
      and plenty of others ... Olympic bows are only shot by athlets competing there and people who want to compete there.

      Only retards shoot an olympic bow. Regarding your 'butthurt' I only supported the minimal sense, my parent's post made.

      Regarding your [what] ... the word left of is is 'now'. N and B are right beside on the keyboard. We are talking about bows. So your '[what]' only shows how retarded you are.

      If you want to defend that toy bows are the right thing for the Olympics, don't talk to me ... I have no influence on the Olympics and I don't participate in toy bow shootings.

      Regarding to shooting an Olympic bow, that kind of archery is no challange in respect to true archery. In regards to that I'm on par with our retarded GP.

      Bottom line: I don't get about what you are arguing ... you shoot a 'normal bow' as good as an Olimpic does a 'special' bow? Is that your point? You can't shoot a normal bow?

      Winning the Olympics means you shoot better than the other competitors ... it has no meaning in regards to the rest of the worlds archers (using other bows or distances, who did not join the Olympics)

      Runnig fast in the Olympics means there are less than 100 people on the planet and in future likely less than 1000 (or lets make it 10000) people who EVER will be faster than you.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    24. Re:do what you want. by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      The majority of archers shoot bows like:...

      Talking about "majority" and then reeling off a list of several examples to compare against one example is bit like arguing that Mandarin isn't the most widely spoken language, because that honour actually falls to Hindi, English and Spanish.

      Only retards shoot an olympic bow.

      No, they don't. But any person who calls someone a "retard" for their choice of sport is definitely a dick.

      Regarding your [what] ... the word left of is is 'now'. N and B are right beside on the keyboard. We are talking about bows. So your '[what]' only shows how retarded you are.

      Oh, of course, how foolish of me not to immediately recognise a typing error that resulted in a common English word, and to then not automatically know what you meant. I do apologise most humbly for daring to ask for clarification.

      By the way, if someone stops arguing with you after you resort to childish slurs, that doesn't mean you were right all along. Might be worth bearing in mind, considering your debating technique.

      If you want to defend that toy bows are the right thing for the Olympics, don't talk to me ...

      That's okay, I'm not here to do that. I just wanted you to justify stating your personal opinion as objective fact. Watching you show yourself up as an ass is an amusing bonus, though.

      Regarding to shooting an Olympic bow, that kind of archery is no challange in respect to true archery.

      Which true archery would that be? Yumi? British longbow? Recurve hunting bow? Hungarian bow? Korean bow?

      Maybe you should ask a true Scotsman.

      Bottom line: I don't get about what you are arguing ... you shoot a 'normal bow' as good as an Olimpic does a 'special' bow? Is that your point?

      I didn't say anything like that. Are you talking to me, or are you talking to the OP now?

      Winning the Olympics means you shoot better than the other competitors ... it has no meaning in regards to the rest of the worlds archers (using other bows or distances, who did not join the Olympics)

      Err, yes? And? You can go one of two ways then - either restrict archers to whatever it is you consider to be "true" archery, but then what? It's pretty much still exactly the same situation. The result will still have "no meaning" to the rest of the world's archers, using other bows or distances. Or let everyone use whatever bow they want, in which case pretty much everyone with a chance at a medal will be using compounds with zoom sights and stabilisers, and then... guess what? It's exactly the same again - no relevance to archers who use other equipment.

      One could make the same arguments about the discus, or the pole vault, or the javelin, or any other event that involves specific equipment. Even running, at a stretch - all that really tells you is that those competitors are among the fastest in the world at running a specific distance on a particular type of track. Usain Bolt is no more or less "the fastest person in the world" than Dennis Kimetto.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    25. Re:do what you want. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      O only supported the OPs point that shooting a modern olympic bow has nothing to do with archery.

      You try to make a mess out of that.

      I stand to my standpoint that archery should cover basic skills in using a 'primitive' bow.

      If you disagree, that is up to you.

      Making an argument about it, trying to get a non native english speaker into a dispute with a native one over spelling mistakes or true scotsmen ... neither serves your intelligence your mine.

      Have a nice day.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  15. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sailing actually requires a LOT of physical exertion. Most sailors have abs of steel.

  16. Relaxing by mrseth · · Score: 2

    I think relaxing ought to be an olympic sport. We could judge it by attaching biometric sensors to the competitors.

    1. Re:Relaxing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PGA Tour guys were training for #dufnering

  17. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spoken like someone who hasn't tried either. Sailing is extremely demanding. Curling is mentally challenging and requires incredible hand-eye coordination and kinesthetic sense, much like some games.

    That said, if your activity involves a poopsock and can be performed sitting down in your pyjamas, it's not a sport and has no place in the olympics.

  18. Re:No by loonycyborg · · Score: 1

    Among those you named only chess can be considered a proper mind only game. And if even Chess is only under occasional consideration, computer games are right out. None of them is even close to matching Chess as a proper sport. Will need centuries for this to happen.

  19. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The current version of the Olympics is about finding new ways to manipulate the rules so that fat western countries can win. If it means allowing professional basketball or hockey players win, then they are all for it. Adding in video game is just the logical extension of this trend.

  20. It's not called the Olympic Sports. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's the Olympic Games. A game shouldn't be accepted or rejected based on if it's a "sport", it should be based on if it's socially or culturally relevant to a significant fraction of the participating nations.

    1. Re:It's not called the Olympic Sports. by NoKaOi · · Score: 1

      Except everything in the Fundamental Principles in the Olympic Charter refers to sports and athleticism.

    2. Re:It's not called the Olympic Sports. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's due to the legacy of the original (Greek) Olympics, rather the modern Olympics - (which include both competitions and games).

    3. Re:It's not called the Olympic Sports. by pkinetics · · Score: 1

      And the competitiveness of the participating nations. One reason softball and baseball were suspended. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B...

  21. Cut Down On Olympic Bloat by rnturn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Get rid of the sports that cannot measure the success of the competitors using the Olympic motto: higher, faster, stronger. That means no figure skating, no synchronized swimming, and, especially, no more rhythmic gymnastics. Essentially, nothing that requires assigning a number to a performance via a panel of judges. (I'm a little torn about any sport that chooses winners based on the points that they score on a particular day but when I think about the excessive coverage given to beach volleyball in the last few Summer Games I lean hard to the "drop them, too" side.)

    Just think how much less expensive it would be to hold an Olympics would be if all those judged "sports" were taken out. The potential sites for the games would mushroom without a need for all the additional venues for the judged events. Cities that hold the Games can rarely afford to and the citizens wind up footing the bill for facilities that will rarely see use after the closing ceremonies. Plus, if it would get Bob Costas' interviews with prepubescent gymnasts off the air, we all win.

    --
    CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
    1. Re:Cut Down On Olympic Bloat by quantaman · · Score: 1

      Get rid of the sports that cannot measure the success of the competitors using the Olympic motto: higher, faster, stronger. That means no figure skating, no synchronized swimming, and, especially, no more rhythmic gymnastics. Essentially, nothing that requires assigning a number to a performance via a panel of judges. (I'm a little torn about any sport that chooses winners based on the points that they score on a particular day but when I think about the excessive coverage given to beach volleyball in the last few Summer Games I lean hard to the "drop them, too" side.)

      Just think how much less expensive it would be to hold an Olympics would be if all those judged "sports" were taken out. The potential sites for the games would mushroom without a need for all the additional venues for the judged events. Cities that hold the Games can rarely afford to and the citizens wind up footing the bill for facilities that will rarely see use after the closing ceremonies. Plus, if it would get Bob Costas' interviews with prepubescent gymnasts off the air, we all win.

      Considering the TV coverage those are probably some of the sports that are actually profitable (assuming you don't build a custom venue).

      The events costing money are the ones you don't hear about.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    2. Re:Cut Down On Olympic Bloat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no figure skating? no synchronized swimming? no gymnastics? there goes half the television viewership; television rights costs plummet, and with it a significant portion of funding.

    3. Re:Cut Down On Olympic Bloat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get rid of the sports that cannot measure the success of the competitors using the Olympic motto: higher, faster, stronger.

      Women's figure skating is consistently the top draw in the Winter Olympics, the one event that people remember decades later. The IOC guys may be corrupt but they're not stupid.

    4. Re:Cut Down On Olympic Bloat by bluegutang · · Score: 2

      That means no figure skating, no synchronized swimming, and, especially, no more rhythmic gymnastics.

      Get rid of all the sports involving scantily clad women? Don't count on it happening.

    5. Re:Cut Down On Olympic Bloat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That means no figure skating, no synchronized swimming, and, especially, no more rhythmic gymnastics.

      Get rid of all the sports involving scantily clad women? Don't count on it happening.

      Scantily clad 13yo girls mostly :) We're not supposed to think they're hot, dumteedumteedum .....

    6. Re:Cut Down On Olympic Bloat by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Almost all sports are judged to some degree, even if it is only a referee making decisions. In any case, those sports are all in there because they have large international competitions and structures, with well defined rules that many athletes feel are worth competing under. If they were just a pure judgement call people wouldn't bother participating since there would be no clear and objective way to measure and improve their performance, but that's not how they work.

      The judges use very specific criteria, just like an examiner does to mark papers in an academic setting. For example, in rhythmic gymnastics there is a list of moves, ranked by difficulty and judged on how well the athlete meets the prescribed forms. It's not about looking good, it's about doing the motions correctly and with a high level of skill.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  22. Of course not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you even imagine the discussion WHICH video game should be played?

    And for those who think video games could be a good spectator sport, I think most people would disagree. Watching an FPS match is very hard to follow for anyone who isn't a regular gamer themselves. And can you imagine having some classic games at the Olympics, like Pac Man or Donkey Kong? The truly good players can go on for hours, hardly an interesting spectacle...

  23. Poetry was an Olympic sport for years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So yes, gaming qualifies easily.

  24. trolling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    should be an olympic sport.

  25. Paralympics by davecb · · Score: 1

    There are people who would love to play FIFA football, and have the talent to do so, but lack legs. They can play sledge hockey, which is at least as good as ordinary hockey, but they can't play kicking games. eSports allow them to kick with their thumbs.

    --
    davecb@spamcop.net
    1. Re:Paralympics by Livius · · Score: 1

      have the talent to do so, but lack legs.

      Only for a very narrow meaning of talent. For the rest of us, that's a contradiction.

    2. Re:Paralympics by davecb · · Score: 1

      Indeed: its mostly tactics, reflexes, the ability to "see" the play as it develops and a dab of strategy. All the physical stuff to put those to use on a field instead of a controller are missing. To that you add a really high muscle "twitch" rate, that's probably not seen in the physical game, only in the simulation.

      --
      davecb@spamcop.net
  26. No! No No no No!!!! by MarkTina · · Score: 2

    What a fecking dumb idea, who wants to watch sweaty geeks with over "developed" wrists play computer games ?!?! Half of them wouldn't be able to make it up the steps to get their medal!

    1. Re:No! No No no No!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Loaded question, immature stereotyping, poor writing style, and worst of all, factually wrong*. I would love to here the rationalization behind +modding this smoking pile of crap.

      * The largest e-sports events regularly attract over hundred thousand viewers, so clearly there is interest.

    2. Re:No! No No no No!!!! by MarkTina · · Score: 1

      Maybe people modded it up because they agree with me ?

      Actually why am I replying to an AC who is criticising my writing style ? this is /. who writes proper here ? Let me go turn on the TV and see what e-sports are currently playing ... oh look .. feck all!! Cause they are boring to watch! :-)

    3. Re:No! No No no No!!!! by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      with over "developed" wrists

      that's not from video games......

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    4. Re:No! No No no No!!!! by alcardil · · Score: 1

      I get the geek/gamer stereotype, but have you seen any of the big esport teams? Sure, there are a few heavy-set gamers; but for the most part they are pretty skinny or at least average looking at the professional level. Check out the team portrait for Na'Vi (one of the top DOTA2 teams), the several LCS teams, or Bajheera (one of the most viewed WoW streamers). Geek shaming should be a thing of the past.

  27. Fuck Yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck yes.

    Then maybe people will finally realize that the Olympics are nothing more than a huge moneymaking scheme for the IOC.

    The spirit of the games has been dead longer than most of you have been alive.

    1. Re: Fuck Yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And some of us would like that to stop. Introducing gaming into that only extends and encourages the problem.

  28. GTA FTFW by kencurry · · Score: 1

    Can't wait for the network coverage.

    --
    sigs are for losers (except to point out that sigs are for losers)
  29. They can do whatever they want by HBI · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not going to watch the retarded shit anyway. I do think that video gaming nowadays should be lumped into regular sport, because it's the same kind of people who play the button mashing games anyway.

    A game that required actual intelligence can hardly be found, never mind made into an Olympic sport.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
  30. Decathlon by khr · · Score: 1

    I vote for the old game, Decathlon for inclusion... It fits, serious physical exertion, coordination with all the keys with a result of trying to run faster or jump higher.

    I never once succeeded at the pole vaulting game in it...

  31. publish98 days by sudo · · Score: 1

    They published this too early. Would have made a good April fools story.

    In any case, there's a world alternative games ... let it be submitted for that.

  32. Re:NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    When I think of a real sport played by athletes, I think of something like no limit Texas hold 'em.

  33. NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But in gaming many fat neckbeards sweat profusely from the physical exertion of pushing buttons longer than 5 seconds.

  34. Re:No by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

    Except that Sailing and Curling are both current olympic sports

    Ever watched Olympics-level curling? The curlers are generaly in great shape.

  35. What a joke, not in this political climate. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Popular press has always been hard on gamers and given GamerGates crassness, the opinions non-gamers have about gamers is at an all time low. But it would be fun to watch the ICC deal with it and see even more press about how gaming isn't a sport and gamers have social and developmental problems.

  36. No. by davydagger · · Score: 1
    Of course a previous Video game company is going to say yes.

    But e-sports, in the olympics, get out of here. Is there poker, chess, or any other more traditional and widely respected table games in the olympics? no.

  37. Nope, it is not a sport. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nope, it is not a sport.

  38. Haevy Chess Pieces by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    Cast the chess pieces in lead and make the board cover an acre such that the chess opponents would have to pick up a 100 lb. chess piece and run to put it on the next square. Seriously chess would not take an upward step by joining the Olympics. It would lower the status of chess players. Or put simply brains are better than muscle tissue unless one is a republican.

  39. Bring back Tug of War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They should bring back Tug of War!

  40. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So are most pro gamers, so you're not saying much with that statement.

  41. Only one game is demanding enough, by yakumo.unr · · Score: 2

    both mentally and physically,

    QUAKE

    1. Re:Only one game is demanding enough, by Nemyst · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You jest, but Quake would be a good candidate on the basis of being open-source. I wouldn't want to see a commercial game be used in the Olympics, the balance would be different every year and features could appear and disappear without control. Plus, there's enough branding going on in today's world without having an event dedicated to a commercial product.

    2. Re:Only one game is demanding enough, by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      There's no chance they'd be using a normal, unmodified commercial game like whatever the latest Call of Duty is, I've lost track. It would either be something open source and probably 10+ years old - ie, already a codified classic - or a newer game that gets locked to a specific version for people to train on, with any bugfixes (the only update allowed) having to pass through an Olympic committee first. Alternatively, there might be a game specially developed just for the Olympics. However, this won't ever happen, so it's all moot.

      I've been a "hardcore gamer" (remember when that was a thing?) since the 90s, and at no point did I ever enjoy watching other people play games, much less be willing to pay big money to watch someone play a game.

  42. Re:NO by sconeu · · Score: 1

    Believe it or not, at one point, someone tried to get Bridge qualified as an Olympic "sport".

    Luckily, they failed.

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  43. Re:NO by Solandri · · Score: 2

    Shooting (pistol/rifle target shooting) is the Olympic sport I think that most supports the inclusion of e-sports. Most "sports" involve physical strength, dexterity, and endurance (and the mental faculties to coordinate them). Shooting is nearly entirely dexterity-based. Just like video games. After shooting would be archery, which adds a physical strength requirement to holding the drawn bow. Interestingly, wheelchair-bound persons have competed in the regular Olympics in shooting and archery.

    Any argument against e-sports works equally well against shooting and archery, except for the arbitrary requirement that the consequences of the "athelete's" actions have to be limited to the physical world. I suppose you could argue for the exclusion of shooting and archery from the Olympics, but competitive archery is one of the oldest sports, at least 2800 years old.

  44. HELL NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It it's not a sport, it's not physical excercise, it's nothing anybody cares about.

  45. No, and the people suggesting this are retarded by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

    You can look back at the 1950 olympic games and see people running and jumping and doing other things that we still do today.

    Now imagine that video games were included, and you look back at the 1980 olympic games. Overweight geeks with mullets and bowl cuts competing intensely over.... Pong and Breakout.

    50 years from now, watching old footage of overweight geeks with lip piercings competing in Counter Strike and Call of Duty will seem just as lame and outdated.

  46. Re:No by davydagger · · Score: 1
    both are physical sports, that are physically demanding.

    Even non-traditional sports like skateboarding and snowboarding have things like the "x-games", because they simply aren't olympic.

    poker and chess are not olympic sports and video games should never be. the only real argument is that its a massive promotional value for game manufactures nothing more.

  47. Not only NO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hell no! This would be a stupid idea on any level.

  48. Re:NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Sport is "activity involving physical exertion and skill"

    How do you explain sports like Shooting and Golf? Both of which are Olympic events. If pulling a trigger counts, why shouldn't pressings keys. Would it be O.K if competitors used controllers? They have triggers.

  49. Why not? by Catmeat · · Score: 1

    After all, competitions in music, literature, sculpture, painting and architecture were part of the Olympics at one time.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  50. Not before they allow bowling by guacamole · · Score: 1

    Bowling is a legitimate sport and should be represented in the Olympic games.

    1. Re:Not before they allow bowling by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      Before they put bowling in I'd want to see ultimate as a game. It has the ideals that the Olympics used to stand for plus it's exciting to play and watch.

  51. No by hooiberg · · Score: 1

    The Olympics are for athletes of the body, not athletes of the mind (although there are psychological aspects to physical sports, and physical aspects to computer games). More over, if we start adding mental games, why not first chess, checkers, go, connect-6 etc.? There are world championships for all of those, and also for computer games. This is the way it should be.

  52. Which games? by Urkki · · Score: 1

    Without concrete suggestion on which games to play, or how to select the games, and all the practicalities involved, this is a pointless suggestion.

  53. Do we have an Olympic Chess Team? by Chas · · Score: 1

    If not, then no.

    Video games can be serious pass-times, and have their own internal/external structures to foster competition.

    But they are NOT "sports", any more than "competitive long-duration sitting" is a sport.

    Yes, a certain modicum of physical skill is required for competitive play.
    However, some of it can be substituted for using technology.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  54. Three ways to look at it. by gurps_npc · · Score: 1
    1) Competition is what matters. Then all the 'mind sports' should be in, including video games. But by that same argument then figure skating and all other 'judged' things should be out - they are NOT really competing against each other, except in a very esoteric manner. There is no clearly defined winner, just people who did are believed to be better.

    2) Physical effort: Then figure skating and dancing should be in, but video games and chess should be out.

    3) Both competitive and physical effort. Here figure skating etc. should be out, as well as video games.

    Frankly, I can't see a way that figure skating and video games both belong in the Olympics.

    Note, I LIKE figure skating. It is a lot more fun to watch than most races. Similarly it is more fun to watch than someone else playing a video game.

    Personally I think tradition will win, which will keep it as a "physical effort", so figure skating stays and video games will not be allowed.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  55. Re:NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's funny, there are plenty of "sports" in the Olympics that already aren't about physical prowess.

    Videogames can raise a heartbeat HIGHER than some of these supposed "sports". How's that for physical exertion?
    Twitch shooters and fighters also train fingers. (so too can playing music instruments)

    The main issue is how you select the appropriate games to feature in it.
    There needs to be a standards process to define what is and isn't acceptable.
    There are a lot of issues to deal with, but games in general CAN be a sport, but only as long as there is some official standards to adhere to so crap like League doesn't get in to it. Pay-to-win crap disguised as free-to-play should absolutely not be allowed anywhere near it. Games that have an absolutely equal standing for all players involved should be the only ones allowed, since then it IS an equal measure of ones ability. Quake for example. No, not even Street Fighter, different character abilities mean nobody is on equal standing.
    There needs to be appropriate BALANCE in the game for it to be of any worth.

    How do you define dancing games as well? These are clearly very physically demanding games. Even more so than some actual sports.
    What about the mind games? Mental exertion is still a thing. Your mental "speed" is still something nobody wants to admit as being part of what makes intelligence worthwhile because it will make so many supposed geniuses absolute retards because it takes them an age to actually formulate something in the first place. The speed at which you can do something IS and SHOULD be what defines intelligence. It is a factor just like your ability to remember.
    Little rant there.

    It already isn't called the Olympic Sports as someone mentioned below. It is called the Olympic GAMEs.
    Check and mate.

  56. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Except that Sailing and Curling are both current olympic sports, Chess is apparently under occasional consideration, and according to wikipedia, even ballooning was once an olympic sport....

    What exactly is it that makes a dumb shit like you comment on a subject
    about which you know nothing ?

    Sailing requires considerable physical ability. The Finn, the Star, the windsurfer,
    and the 505 all require the sailors to be in very good shape. Those sailors who
    are not won't even get to the Olympics.

  57. Stupid idiots. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Despite the amount of stupid people that thinks video games is a sport (e-sport). It is not. Therefore, it makes no sense to have it in the Olympics.

    1. Re:Stupid idiots. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, now that you've definitively settled that question perhaps you'd like to solve world peace next.

  58. One year, as a demonstration "sport" ... by MacTO · · Score: 1

    I think it would be good as a demonstration sport for one of the games, if they select the game carefully to align with what the games are.

    The thing is, the games are mostly about physical competition along with physical factors that have a strong psychological element such as endurance and reaction time. Video games are poor at the former but rely heavily upon the latter, which is why I think they would be excellent as a demonstration sport but not as an ongoing element of the games.

  59. NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And neither should shit like chess.

    But I'm a person who'd be happy if the Olympics just disappeared altogether.

  60. Interesting ides... by jonwil · · Score: 1

    Its an interesting idea but there are so many issues to resolve.
    Which platform do you use? Xbox? PlayStation? PC?
    If PC, who defines the system specs? Which games do you use?
    Who defines what settings are used for each match like the level to use? What would the rules be regarding player choices like e.g. which faction the player picks in an RTS? What happens if the internet or severs go down mid-match?

    Of couse some of these questions have already been answered by existing e-sports contests and the IOC would probably defer to that rather than inventing new rules. (just like olympic golf, if it was a thing, would be played according to the rules set down by St Andrews Royal & Ancient instead of inventing ndw ones)

    1. Re:Interesting ides... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are all the worst things that should happen.

      The only games that should ever be acceptable for E-sports Olympics are games where everything is predictable and repeatable, and every person performing in it has an equal standing.

      So out goes Street Fighter, League of Legends, most FPS games that don't have an equal symmetry or starting position for everyone, all RTSes that aren't balanced in general, etc.
      In fact, you COULD have Street Fighter, but only if everyone was forced to use same players to keep balance.
      But yes, if you were to have scenarios where you made everyone play the same character, possibly even different characters at different stages of progression, that could expand the possible games you could use.

      The key part to take away from this though: equality for all players involved. Unbalanced games aren't good measures of ability.
      And to be perfectly honest, any team game is a poor measure of personal ability, so shouldn't ever be used as Olympics sports, or at least should be in a separate group.
      Team games and sports aren't bad. Teamwork, while a very good attribute, has an inherent instability in it because every person taking part has a very different set of skills across the board. A team that absolutely knows each other inside-out is a very good thing.
      I just prefer one-to-one competition where everyone is in it for their own demonstration of skill, rather than depending on others to perform their absolute best.

    2. Re:Interesting ides... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then just use Unreal Tournament, the original one. That is probably the most balanced and responsive multiplayer game ever made. Also nobody begins with an advantage.

  61. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So are most pro gamers, so you're not saying much with that statement.

    Uh... No, they're not.

  62. Re:Olympic Shitting! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's do it. There'd be an Olympic sport I could actually win!

  63. Yes, but I pick the game by GoodNewsJimDotCom · · Score: 1

    Epyx: Summer Games for C64. Then we'd have someone going,"Oh you won the gold medal for diving? Well I got the gold medal for diving too, and pole vault, and 100m dash."

  64. Mind Game or Not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We definitely need to define the difference between "mind sports" like Chess, Poker and Others with video games like League of Legends, Starcraft 2, Team Fortress 2, and many others.
    So let's define some things before we get going:
    Mind Sports: We'll leave things like Chess, Poker, etc., in this category.
    Macro Scale Sports: Sports that require large movements of the body, whether you are with something that is moving your body(i.e. Bobsledding, Cycling, Skiing, etc.), or you are moving your body. (i.e. Swimming, Wrestling, Javelin Throw, etc.) These are sports that are accepted in society today.
    Micro Scale Sports: Sports that require small movements of the body. Things that require Mouse/Keyboard movement would be included in this category. You could conceivably add in other MSS(Micro Scale Sports), although I'll let others comment on what others could be included.
    So they could be included if Micro Scale Sports are included in the Olympics.
    After all, some sports and games have great similarities.
    As a side note, I've looked at a Soccer(Football) game and found striking similarities to how a Starcraft game "flows". They both use strategies, they both require dexterity and skill, and the both require practice for you to become good at them. And one of them requires a pitched battle for the game to end. I'll let you you decide which one.

  65. Fuck the olympics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Olympics. is not about athletic competition.

    No, the Olympics sole purpose of existence today is to promote your corporate fascist overlords who control your every thought and form your every opinion.

    Humanity sure is fucking stupid.

  66. Olympics -Special Olympics - Virtual Olymipics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not that Video Games should be in the Olympics, it's that they would need their own event afterwards, IF they were to move ahead with the idea.

    This way countries could put for multiple teams for various games, some of which could be Sporting Events, but with no need for real Judges or Referees. Everyone would be bound to the same coded rules within the game. Zero discrimination......unless those sneaky Devs rig it for their own country :P

  67. Wrong Question by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

    I would have preferred to have been asked, "should the Olympics be abolished?".

    The Olympics is little more than dirty politics, enriching the members of the IOC with bribe money and having an overall negative impact on the common citizens of the countries that host the games. Of course, they do provide free condoms and a great opportunity for the few privileged participants to have lots of sex, but unless you're one of the uber-rich that can afford to compete then that probably isn't important to you. And lets not even get started on what they have done to legitimate businesses who innocently used the words Olympic or Olympus in their names for decades before the games came to their city. They do at least as much harm to the overall community as a Papal visit. The games and the IOC should be abolished, not grown.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  68. Unavailability of copies of old games by tepples · · Score: 1

    Because virtual shooting changes far more rapidly than physical shooting. Strategies that work in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare may fail in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. Even if you standardize on one particular iteration of a series, there's no guarantee that the game's publisher will still be willing to sell copies of the old iteration. And the demise of GameSpy has shown that multiplayer won't even be available in older games after a service provider hardcoded into the game pulls the plug.

  69. Comparison from one Games to the next by tepples · · Score: 1

    If we play a match of FIFA 2015 there will be absolutely no question as to who the winner is.

    Will multiplayer in FIFA 2015 still be playable in 2019? 2023?

    1. Re:Comparison from one Games to the next by dcollins · · Score: 1

      For rhetorical purposes, I would not have posed that as a question.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
  70. irony by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    So they had to have an international meeting to discuss how nobody wants Parkour in the olympics because, as they top level famous pros put it, if you think you did good then you did and you win. Then there's thousands of e-sports pros that do want to be in the olympics but the top olympics people are ignoring them.

  71. Games leave the market by tepples · · Score: 1

    Any argument against e-sports works equally well against shooting and archery

    You can still buy new equipment for shooting or archery. You can't buy new equipment for pre-infinite-spin Tetris because Tetris Holding won't let anybody sell it.

    competitive archery is one of the oldest sports, at least 2800 years old

    I'm in favor of including any sport that's at least 95 years old.

  72. StepMania, but not yet by tepples · · Score: 1

    How do you define dancing games as well? These are clearly very physically demanding games.

    Once Konami's patents on Dance Dance Revolution expire in a few more years, I would be willing to add StepMania alongside floor exercise. StepMania is physical but doesn't need nearly as many human judges as the existing gymnastic events.

  73. Bows have evolved by tepples · · Score: 1

    Bows aren't obsolete. The crossbow holds a silence advantage over firearms.

    1. Re:Bows have evolved by sdguero · · Score: 1

      And horses have their own advantages.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...
      My point still stands. For the most part, bows are obsolete and not used nearly as much as before the spread of firearms over 400 years ago (which btw, can be silenced with a little bit of effort).

    2. Re:Bows have evolved by Nemyst · · Score: 1

      Bows and crossbows have very little in common, aside from using a string to throw a projectile.

    3. Re:Bows have evolved by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      It does not. Unlike a silenced gunshot, you hear the crossbow's bolt comming and can dodge it. Well, unless you wear mediveal helmets etc. ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  74. Re:NO by Skidborg · · Score: 2

    Because both of those sports still require physical coordination brought to bear against real, physical objects. And there is a hell of a lot more to real shooting than just pulling a trigger.

    --
    Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
  75. lol... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    watching kids playing COD as an olympic contest.... oh god no lol...

  76. My soul just died a little more by InlawBiker · · Score: 1

    {nt}

  77. Re:NO by antdude · · Score: 1

    I exercise with my fingers, hands, arms, eyeballs, brain, etc. :P

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  78. Re:NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Until we fully understand what sport truly is, in relation to games and competitions, (and even work and play), nothing will ever be consistent.

  79. Sitting team handball perhaps? by tepples · · Score: 1

    Basketball, team handball, soccer, rugby and gridiron football are members of a family of sports based on advancing the ball into the goal based on restrictions against arbitrarily carrying it. A Paralympic sport in the same family is wheelchair basketball. I wonder what sort of other sports in the same family could be invented for people with no legs like Jennifer Bricker in the same way that volleyball was adapted into sitting volleyball.

  80. Re:No by Dragonslicer · · Score: 2

    So are most pro gamers, so you're not saying much with that statement.

    "Oblate spheroid" was not the shape that was being described.

  81. Mirror match by tepples · · Score: 1

    Street Fighter II lacked symmetric starting positions. This was rectified in Street Fighter II' Champion Edition and later Street Fighter games.

  82. The New Triathlon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thumbwrestling, Doritos-eating and Deer Hunter.

    Think Slashdot could sweep the medals?

  83. No, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and there are already things in the olympics which IMO do not belong.

    IMO, the only thing that should count as a sport and be included are things that can be objectively counted, measured, and/or timed.
    Any activity that is *judged*, even if only arguably subjectively doesn't qualify. Yes, this does exclude TV favorites like figure skating. Others would be snowboarding, diving, etc. Yes, they involve skill and should have a venue, just not in the olympics.

    How fast you do something, how far you go/move/throw something, or how many times you do something cannot be argued.

    How "perfect" on a subjective scale you execute some triple-twist-spin-720-backflip-pike-piruette doesn't count.

  84. No, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I haven't watched the olympics for years, but sure would if they'd go back to competing naked.

  85. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ballooning...how....exciting. Wonder why it was cut. Video games would be cut from the games if they ever got added because of cheating or claims of cheating. People will find a way to alter the program slightly to give them an advantage.

  86. No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. NEXT!

  87. Re:NO by hawk · · Score: 0

    If golf, bowling, and baseball are sports . . .

    hawk

  88. One year, as a demonstration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Videogames aren't sport in any conceivable way. They just aren't.

    1. Re:One year, as a demonstration by MacTO · · Score: 1

      I never said that they were a sport, and stuck the quotation marks around "sport" in the comment subject to imply they aren't. Video games do have certain elements of sports which may make them an interesting element as a demonstration sport.

  89. Re:NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's no such thing as e-sports. Computer games are not a sport.

    Now stop sipping Mountain Dew and go play a real sport.

  90. retarded shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck no. Olmypics are totally about what you can do with your body. Physical stuff, as a human.

    Save the video game and chess shit for other competitions.

    http://www.myronmays.com/

    1. Re:retarded shit by kuzb · · Score: 1

      When was the last time you played a video game without using your body?

      --
      BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
  91. Re:NO by pkinetics · · Score: 1

    Is that gaming, or masturbating, or one and the same? :)

  92. Sorry, no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Watching someone else playing video games is BORING! That alone should disqualify it as an Olympic option, let alone the only using your thumbs thing and the determinate nature of success in gaming, i.e., once you know what enemies and layouts are in the levels it's just practice to get past them. How would you compete? Time to finish, number of points, number of lives left, etc., etc., etc.? No, just no. Get your own damn global competition and spare the rest of us, please. Wait, you already have one! (that failed once already)

  93. It wouldn't be competitive by RoadDoggFL · · Score: 2

    Women's Softball was removed because the US kept winning (and lost the last year it was included, I think). Women's hockey is at risk of being removed because only the US and Canada ever win. So would video games stay in the Olympics when every medal is claimed by Koreans? Also, what would they even play? Games don't really last four years, and whichever game is selected will have a developer and (definitely) publisher that want to get the sequel in the next Olympics. Nobody would take it seriously if there's a different set of games every year. How would you track the advancement of the competition/skill/level of human achievement if they never do the same thing twice? Most events give you an example of how performances are improving over the years.

    --
    "This is considered plagiarism."
  94. Caffeine is a PED by sjbe · · Score: 1

    Caffeine is already banned as a PED above certain quantities. (Or at least it was last time I checked)

  95. Re:NO by antdude · · Score: 1

    All of above. :P

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  96. Re:NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Olympics is for sports. Not games.

    Pretty much any competitive sport is a game.

    Sport is "activity involving physical exertion and skill"

    Not according to the International Olympics Committee, who recognize Chess as a sport.

  97. Why not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I like watching gameplay videos on Youtube. Mostly they are people who are entertaining to listen to, and games that I am interested in. That's my version of TV watching (when I don't feel like engaging in much mental activity / had a long day).

    For the olympics, it would be games that emphasize strategy or fast reflexes. They should upload to Youtube and/or have a client that allows playback in slow mo.

  98. Only by jmv · · Score: 1

    If the game itself is open-source and written by an international body. Having Olympics based on a proprietary game would just be insane. Just as insane as saying that swimming is owned by a company.

  99. No. If you can drink beer and smoke by jpellino · · Score: 1

    while competing then no, it is not athletics.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  100. Re:NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even if you accept the notion that watching somebody else playing a video game is entertaining to large numbers of people with normal brain function, and thus qualifies as a "spectator sport", using this as the basis for including an activity in the Olympics overlooks one should-be-obvious fact: that's not what the Olympics are based on. If it did, then baseball and American football – which are routinely played in huge stadiums with even larger TV audiences – would be included, while fencing, badminton, synchronized swimming, and curling – usually played in front of a few close family members (if that) – would not.

  101. Like Any Other Sport by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...if they can sell tickets to it, they will incorporate it. And that means that another sport won't be covered...

    Given the streaming/Twitch numbers, and the minimal resources needed (compared to some sports) - I imagine it'd be very cost effective compared to something that requires a course (and conditions) like skiing, cycling, etc.

    The real question is: Which Olympics would gaming take place in?

  102. Pierre de Coubertin by westlake · · Score: 1

    Get rid of the sports that cannot measure the success of the competitors using the Olympic motto: higher, faster, stronger. That means no figure skating, no synchronized swimming, and, especially, no more rhythmic gymnastics. Essentially, nothing that requires assigning a number to a performance via a panel of judges.

    The motto was proposed by Pierre de Coubertin on the creation of the International Olympic Committee in 1894."These three words represent a programme of moral beauty. The aesthetics of sport are intangible."

    I take that as an explicit rejection of the notion that the human element can be taken out of the equation.

    That "higher, faster, stronger" implies an aesthetically pleasing and moral achievement, not merely something which can be captured and understood by examining the clock and camera alone.

    Coubertin would go on to say that "The most important thing is not to win but to take part!"

    Olympic symbols

  103. Video Games in Olympics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Video games would be must more interesting than dressage, sailing, skeleton and biathlon... and test their minds as well as their reflexes...

  104. Re:NO by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    Maybe we should limit it to those joystick waggling games from the 80's, and Dance Dance revolution.

  105. Fuck The Olympics by ButchDeLoria · · Score: 1

    Video games shouldn't be added simply so they're not even more stigmatized by the public and the media. The International Olympic Committee stands for nothing more than corruption and the breeding of children into pets that can do very specific tricks, win a medal, and 1) make money by being the face of sponsored cheap processed human chow if they're very lucky and good, or 2) fall into obscurity after training their entire life to be good at one arbitary physical activity. It's a human version of the Westminster Dog Show, but with slightly less inbreeding.

  106. Perspiration by Old+Aylesburian · · Score: 1

    My touchstone is that if it doesn't make you sweat then it isn't a sport. Darts and snooker are entertaining, and require skill, but are not sports.

  107. Why not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The olympics include the most ridiculous "sport" of all, to wit, synchronized swimming. Once synchronized swimming has become an olympic sport, anything goes.

  108. think again by itchybrain · · Score: 1

    To all those who think we should do away with figure skating, rhythmic gymnastics, etc. because those sports require panels of judges, think again.

    In a game of football (or soccer) and ice-hockey, you need referees. In badminton and tennis, you need umpires. In fact most sports require arbiters of sorts. How many times have you seen a match swing from one team/player to another because of a bad call (Maradona's Hand of God, anyone)?

  109. But only naked males in old Olympics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't want to take precedence too far!

  110. Hand-eye coordination is not atheltic by mark-t · · Score: 1

    Certainly it's a respectable skill, and it's no disrespect to people who work very hard at some tasks to improve that, but at its core, good video game playing is ultimately about having good mental reflexes and strongly developed hand-eye coordination. To excel, this can require no less time than it takes for an Olympic athlete to train, but that doesn't mean it should be an Olympic event any more than a spelling bee should be.

  111. There can be only one answer here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NO.

    End of topic.

  112. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Snowboarding is in the Olympics....

    Freestyle skiing (the gymnast twirly dos that you can see in classic movies like "Ski School") has been in the Olympics for much longer...

  113. Al about the shoes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's all about the shoes. If you don't need special shoes it's not a real sport.

    Cycling, Running, Gymnastics, Horse Riding are all real sports.

    Chess are not.

    OK I'll change that if you need special clothes to do your activity it's considered a sport.
    This will include Swimming,

    Still excludes Gaming, Chess, Checkers.

  114. Re:NO by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

    ^ Played with real money, not casino money...

    Show up with $100,000 of YOUR real cash and play against experts and tell me that it doesn't require a ton of skill...

  115. Sorry mate, Gaming is NOT a sport by Optali · · Score: 1

    A sport is a competitive activity that includes physical activity. Gaming is not a sport in the same way that poker is not a sport and if gaming has to be in the Olympics, then poker, monopoly and yatzee should be too.

    --
    -- 29A the number of the Beast