Actually, the argument of mine that has been 'obliterated' is that Gymnastics is not objective. I'm not sure, but if everyone who has posted has been completely factual, then I would say that Gymnastics is, in fact, a sport.
I still stand by my definition of sport, however, as one that allows for all commonly-agreed-upon sports to be defined as such, and doesn't allow for things that are commonly-agreed-upon not to be sports (such as playing fetch with a dog).
If you want to disprove my argument, then you will have to show how it is possible to allow subjectivity into the scoring of a sport, without allowing absurd things like competitive sculpting.
Assuming you are right, and gymnastics is scored objectively..I'm having a hard time understanding the use of the term judge. What is it that they are judging?
If all they are doing is score-keeping, then gymnastics works perfectly into my definition of sport, and welcome to it.
Sorry, there were quite a few replies and it's hard to keep track of all of usernames.
It doesn't help that right when things were getting good, slashdot starts up with "oh, you've replied too much, stop for a while and we'll see if you get to post again."
HOW IN THE WORLD is NASCAR not physically active? They sustain 150+ heart rates for 3-4 hour stints and require a ton of hand-eye-foot coordination... and physical strength and endurance.
Physically demanding is NOT the same as physically active.
When it comes down to it, NASCAR drivers are sitting still and directing their car.
If I club you repeatedly while you play Mario Brothers (in order to fulfill the other two requirements, let's assume that someone else is attempting to beat it before you, and is also getting clubbed) are you participating in a sport? Your heart rate is sure to be high, due to the fight/flight response and it requires a ton of coordination, physical strength, and endurance.
I'm trying to develop a better definition of sport, one that excludes everything that people agree isn't a sport, and includes everything that people agree is a sport. This definition can then be used to determine the fringe cases that people don't agree on. (ie - gymnastics)
I've been working this for a while, CmdrTaco just gave me a great excuse for running it through a trial by fire - which it seems to be passing. People are now arguing whether or not gymnastics is a sport - based on my definition - rather than whether or not my definition is accurate.;-D
Sorry however that you are offended by the idea that some sport competitions have an artistic component.
Who said it offended me? I'm just trying to see if my definition of sport holds up under scrutiny, by which I mean that it does not include things that almost everyone does not consider to be a sport, and includes everything that almost everyone considers to be a sport.
Be that as it may, I've just spend a bit of time looking through dictionaries at the word "sport" and I don't see any that suggest some sort of mutual exclusiveness between "sport" and "art."
1: The dictionaries' definition is inadequate for the reason I stated above. 2: You are putting words into my mouth, I never said that sport and art are mutually exclusive. It may be possible to deduce that from my statements, but I'm not sure if it is possible.
To be pedantic though that was only one thing that is necessary for something to be a sport, you'll find my list of sufficient prerequisites here.
I should mention how I developed this list.
I have had this argument before, and this is what came out of it, I have found that it includes everything that (almost) everyone agrees is a sport, while excluding everything that (almost) everyone agrees is not.
Note that this means that it excludes some that some people think should be a sport.
Is it possible for a gymnast to keep a running total of his/her score in his/her head (I don't think that they would do this, even if they could, it's better to concentrate on performing, - I'm just asking if it's theoretically possible)?
but if you take something - say ice skating and make it so that x gives y points.. then everyone will just learn to perfect the move with the highest y and then you will just see a chain of them for the length of the event..
Which would make it as boring as most sports.
it is perfectly acceptable for it to be subjective - this is why there is more than one judge - and they do have guide lines for quality and performance..
It's acceptable, but it's not a sport.
while i agree it might be better to call it a competition than a sport - i do believe it has just as much a place in the Olympics as sports.
You will find that I have not contradicted this statement during the course of this entire conversation.
pure artistic stuff i don't think is right for the Olympics but if it is a good hybrid between art and athletics then go for it.
Many things that are not sports are Olympic-worthy. Athletics != sports.
'...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
I was working on the premise that sport and game were not mutually exclusive.
In addition to being objective, however, I would say that a sport also has to involve competition. So mountaineering and bullfighting would be out (unless you were racing to get to the top of the mountain or kill the bull) but racing would be a sport...in most situations. I don't consider NASCAR to be a sport..
Jacob's sufficient requirements for sport-status: ~Competitive ~Scoring is Objective ~Physically Active
Slashdot Mirror
That's not really that long....
Don't forget the painstaking grammar and spelling checking.
Plus they had to go through all the archives to make sure it wasn't a dupe.
Once again, that sounds demanding, but not active. You know, 'active' where a lot of motion is involved?
What physics are those? What is it that NASCAR drivers do makes them physically active?
I considered this when developing my definition, but too many people consider track events to be a sport to eliminate them.
I would like to nominate this as best sentence of the year.
Actually, the argument of mine that has been 'obliterated' is that Gymnastics is not objective. I'm not sure, but if everyone who has posted has been completely factual, then I would say that Gymnastics is, in fact, a sport.
I still stand by my definition of sport, however, as one that allows for all commonly-agreed-upon sports to be defined as such, and doesn't allow for things that are commonly-agreed-upon not to be sports (such as playing fetch with a dog).
If you want to disprove my argument, then you will have to show how it is possible to allow subjectivity into the scoring of a sport, without allowing absurd things like competitive sculpting.
Not discriminate, but categorize, yes.
Olympic athletics shouldn't be trivialized. Nor should they be referred to as 'sports'.
Assuming you are right, and gymnastics is scored objectively..I'm having a hard time understanding the use of the term judge. What is it that they are judging?
If all they are doing is score-keeping, then gymnastics works perfectly into my definition of sport, and welcome to it.
Yeah, I guess I should clarify that physical activity refers to the athlete, and not any physical activity.
Sorry, there were quite a few replies and it's hard to keep track of all of usernames.
It doesn't help that right when things were getting good, slashdot starts up with "oh, you've replied too much, stop for a while and we'll see if you get to post again."
Either you are prejudiced against NASCAR
Guilty.
HOW IN THE WORLD is NASCAR not physically active? They sustain 150+ heart rates for 3-4 hour stints and require a ton of hand-eye-foot coordination ... and physical strength and endurance.
Physically demanding is NOT the same as physically active.
When it comes down to it, NASCAR drivers are sitting still and directing their car.
If I club you repeatedly while you play Mario Brothers (in order to fulfill the other two requirements, let's assume that someone else is attempting to beat it before you, and is also getting clubbed) are you participating in a sport? Your heart rate is sure to be high, due to the fight/flight response and it requires a ton of coordination, physical strength, and endurance.
There is a difference between arbitrary and subjective.
How close together do the legs have to be before the deduction isn't warrented?
Pressed tightly together? Thighs touching but a half of a centimeter between the knees and feet? thighs one degree apart? two degrees?
He makes the claim that the scoring is not subjective, then goes on to explain the scoring process. So far so good.
When he makes the statement that the starting value is rated on "degree of difficulty" he is describing a subjective judgment.
Therefore, his argument has broken down at that point in the post.
See this post for my rebuttal to that statement.
I'm trying to develop a better definition of sport, one that excludes everything that people agree isn't a sport, and includes everything that people agree is a sport. This definition can then be used to determine the fringe cases that people don't agree on. (ie - gymnastics)
I've been working this for a while, CmdrTaco just gave me a great excuse for running it through a trial by fire - which it seems to be passing. People are now arguing whether or not gymnastics is a sport - based on my definition - rather than whether or not my definition is accurate. ;-D
Sorry however that you are offended by the idea that some sport competitions have an artistic component.
Who said it offended me? I'm just trying to see if my definition of sport holds up under scrutiny, by which I mean that it does not include things that almost everyone does not consider to be a sport, and includes everything that almost everyone considers to be a sport.
Be that as it may, I've just spend a bit of time looking through dictionaries at the word "sport" and I don't see any that suggest some sort of mutual exclusiveness between "sport" and "art."
1: The dictionaries' definition is inadequate for the reason I stated above. 2: You are putting words into my mouth, I never said that sport and art are mutually exclusive. It may be possible to deduce that from my statements, but I'm not sure if it is possible.
That would work, but I would be more inclined to use how big the jump was as a way of scoring.
This would make it subjective, and thus a judged competition.
No problem, I'm here all week.
To be pedantic though that was only one thing that is necessary for something to be a sport, you'll find my list of sufficient prerequisites here.
I should mention how I developed this list.
I have had this argument before, and this is what came out of it, I have found that it includes everything that (almost) everyone agrees is a sport, while excluding everything that (almost) everyone agrees is not.
Note that this means that it excludes some that some people think should be a sport.
I don't think that it's physically active.
Physically demanding, yes, but not active. Being punched repeatedly while tied to a wall is physically demanding, but not at all active.
Is it possible for a gymnast to keep a running total of his/her score in his/her head (I don't think that they would do this, even if they could, it's better to concentrate on performing, - I'm just asking if it's theoretically possible)?
I don't follow gymnastics, so I'm really asking.
a particular vault for example has a maximum starting value based upon the "degree of difficulty".
Your argument breaks down here.
but if you take something - say ice skating and make it so that x gives y points.. then everyone will just learn to perfect the move with the highest y and then you will just see a chain of them for the length of the event..
Which would make it as boring as most sports.
it is perfectly acceptable for it to be subjective - this is why there is more than one judge - and they do have guide lines for quality and performance..
It's acceptable, but it's not a sport.
while i agree it might be better to call it a competition than a sport - i do believe it has just as much a place in the Olympics as sports.
You will find that I have not contradicted this statement during the course of this entire conversation.
pure artistic stuff i don't think is right for the Olympics but if it is a good hybrid between art and athletics then go for it.
Many things that are not sports are Olympic-worthy. Athletics != sports.
'...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
But would it be a sport? ;-p
I was working on the premise that sport and game were not mutually exclusive.
In addition to being objective, however, I would say that a sport also has to involve competition. So mountaineering and bullfighting would be out (unless you were racing to get to the top of the mountain or kill the bull) but racing would be a sport...in most situations. I don't consider NASCAR to be a sport..
Jacob's sufficient requirements for sport-status:
~Competitive
~Scoring is Objective
~Physically Active