Sports

I was arguing with Nobbit last night about sports. Somehow we got onto a discussion of sports and what constituted a sport and I proclaimed that Risk was a much more difficult sport than darts. To which she replied "Risk isn't a sport!!"

Then we had a big long discussion. Here is what Nobbit concluded, and I reluctantly agreed with (reluctantly because I don't like being wrong).

She said that there was a class of activities. This class has 2 sub-classes. One is sports - any competition that involves physical skill or activity done by the player himself. Sports usually also involve mental skill. The other sub-class is games. Games are competitions that involve mental skills and physical skills, though ones where the physical skills or activities can be done by another person with no difference to the outcome of the game.

So as an example, she said that Football is a sport. There is a physical activity required, that of throwing, catching, running, etc. There is also the mental skill required, that of knowing the plays, running the routes, evading other players, etc. The physical activity must be done by the player - it makes a difference if Brett Favre is playing QB or if I am playing QB.

The other example is... Risk. There is the mental aspect, that of calculating the attacks, making and breaking alliances, planning ahead, defending your places. There is also the physical requirement, that of moving the pieces, rolling the dice, etc. Game play and the outcome isn't really affected by the person doing the physical activities. For example, I could direct Nobbit in her moves and in what to do, she could roll the dice and move the pieces, and the outcome would be the same as if I did everything myself.


Now, I disagree on principle. I think her reasoning is good, but I want Risk to be considered a sport, darn it! So I began thinking of outlying cases to shake up her analysis.

My ideas were these. Video games. Sport or game? I mean, there is definitely a physical skill or activity, and a mental skill required. Take for example Tetris Attack. If you don't know it, look it up, cause I wouldn't be able to explain it well. It makes a big difference whether I play Tetris Attack or Jerris does (Jerris being really good at it and me being really bad at it). I could have the mental skills required to play a stellar game of Tetris Attack, but if I don't have the physical skill, the dexterity, I'm gonna lose if I physically play.

Second idea. A musical competition. Sport, game or neither? There is a definite physical component and there is a mental component too. Picking the right songs, not getting psyched out, not forgetting the music. And the physical skill is particular to the player. It matters who you get to play the guitar solo.

________________________________

Now, as I was writing this I got to thinking about the distinction between sport and game that Nobbit was making, and I think to help her side of the argument, I might define sport as follows:
A sport is any competition that involves some degree of specialized physical skill and some degree of specialized mental skill.

That means a sport needs the player to have specialized skill, like running, throwing etc. If another person can't do the physical activity in your place due to training and practice, that seems to suggest it's more of a sport than a game.

But still, my two ideas remain valid. Still strong. So what do you guys think... video games - sport? music competitions - sport? Or am I getting it wrong?