local article--poker isnt a sport--near clemson SC

[Hoi Polloi]

I don't have a definition of sport vs. game vs. competition. I think there are significant gray areas. That said, let me put a few stakes in the ground and see how people feel about them. Feel free to amend these and/or and your own.

1. Cablecasting by ESPN is neither a sufficient nor necessary condition for an activity to be considered a sport.

2. Athlete is from the greek root Athlon (prize) and designated someone who competes for a prize. This root suggests a broad baseline definition of a sport. However, business professionals who compete for bonuses might fall into this broad definition and are not, in my view, athletes.

3. Athletic competition takes one of two general forms: a)precise manipulation of physical objects: think ball games; and b) precise physical manipulation of one's own body: think racing events, jumping events and things like figure skating, etc.

4. An argument could be made that chess and poker are physically demanding. But is that sufficient to satisfy the athlete test? How about the sport test?

5. Must sporting be configured such that winners are determined solely by participants without relying on judging? Who crosses the finish line, who scores the most points? Versus who got the best scores from the judges? Where does that leave figure skating which clearly meets several athletic categories.

5. What is the value of drawing a line between sport, athletics and any competition?

6. Is timeframe a factor to consider? That is discreet periods of competition with definite beginnings and ends? Are Steve Jobs and Bill Gates involved in a sports competition?

8. Is a sport simply an event that experienced gamblers would be willing to wager on? Ruling out, therefore, pro wrestling, but ruling in almost any aleatory event?

Anyway, just some thoughts. As I said above, I'm skeptical that a universal definition can be found to which everyone will agree, but the process of defining the parameters may be enjoyable, thought-provoking and worthwhile.

[Big Dave D]

Its old, but still true today:

Sport of Kings

gl

bdd

[Teh1337zor]

not a sport

[Hume]

[ QUOTE ]
It's not a sport if you ever hear the words, "we're waiting on the judges decision."

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you realize how many sports this would disqualify?

[His Boy Elroy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's not a sport if you ever hear the words, "we're waiting on the judges decision."

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you realize how many sports this would disqualify?

[/ QUOTE ]

They need an umpire to call balls vs strikes in baseball even.

[otter]

I don't think it's a sport either and it's ridiculous to call it one.

[MicroBob]

Not a sport obviously but I'm not really bothered by ESPN showing it because as a game it works okay into their programming (a few less reruns though please).

When ESPN did the Poker-drama Tilt my reaction was more, "WTF? Why is ESPN doing a drama TV show about poker?"
And I knew some sports-fans but non-poker-fans who were even more WTF about it (and this was before it had even started when we would get to see how truly bad the show itself was).


The article reminds me of 2003-ish when poker was first getting more time on TV via the hole-card cams, the WPT and the expanded WSOP coverage on ESPN.
I was on an e-mail list-serv for minor-league and small-college sports-broadcasters and one guy wrote a long rant about having just seen "Poker on TV" and he thought it was bizarre especially since he apparently didn't even know how to play (I assume he was watching WPT).
Stuff like, "Can you believe this? Showing poker on TV. One guy would push his chips in and then the other guy would do the same and then they would have a bunch of cards on the table and one of them was somehow declared the winner.
I don't even know what to call the announcers. Is he a play-by-play announcer or should I call him a card-by-card announcer?"

Obviously things have changed a bit since then and practically anyone and everyone is familiar with poker on TV and doesn't think it's strange in the least.
Still doesn't make it a sport though.

[tarheeljks]

[ QUOTE ]
Not a sport obviously but I'm not really bothered by ESPN showing it because as a game it works okay into their programming (a few less reruns though please).

When ESPN did the Poker-drama Tilt my reaction was more, "WTF? Why is ESPN doing a drama TV show about poker?"
And I knew some sports-fans but non-poker-fans who were even more WTF about it (and this was before it had even started when we would get to see how truly bad the show itself was).


The article reminds me of 2003-ish when poker was first getting more time on TV via the hole-card cams, the WPT and the expanded WSOP coverage on ESPN.
I was on an e-mail list-serv for minor-league and small-college sports-broadcasters and one guy wrote a long rant about having just seen "Poker on TV" and he thought it was bizarre especially since he apparently didn't even know how to play (I assume he was watching WPT).
Stuff like, "Can you believe this? Showing poker on TV. One guy would push his chips in and then the other guy would do the same and then they would have a bunch of cards on the table and one of them was somehow declared the winner.
I don't even know what to call the announcers. Is he a play-by-play announcer or should I call him a card-by-card announcer?"

Obviously things have changed a bit since then and practically anyone and everyone is familiar with poker on TV and doesn't think it's strange in the least.
Still doesn't make it a sport though.

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed. ESPN= Entertainment and Sports Programming Network, so just b/c ESPN gives an event a slot does not make that event a sport. poker is a great game but it's not a sport.

[tarheeljks]

i have had a number of arguments over whether games such as poker and chess are sports and point #4 always comes up. in my mind saying poker/chess are physically demanding does not satisfy the requisite of physical exertion b/c any activity that involves a great degree of concentration can be physically demanding. in order for something to qualify as a sport i believe that any resulting physical exertion needs to be the result of non-standard physical activity.

[s33w33d]

Having been heavily involved in Chess, specifically the recognition of Chess as a sport by the International Olympic Committee (along with Bridge), I found that there is a very different definition of sport based on monther tongue. For the native English speakers and Scandinavia, "sport" really refers specifically to athletic competition, which chess/bridge/poker certainly is not one.

Of course, in Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa and South and Central America, chess has been well embraced as a sport, and has even been a medal event in the IOC's Asian Games.

Chess is definitely a sport (IOC says so), but it is not an athletic competition, which is what "sport" is taken to mean in the USA. I would say the same goes for poker.

[As an aside, it's certainly more of a sport than synchronized swimming and curling.]