Just some more food for thought on thjs subject.
What defines a sport? Like a ping-pong match, the debate goes back and forth
By DAVID ANDRIESEN
P-I REPORTER
Search for "cup stacking" on YouTube, and you can watch more than 1,000 videos of people taking nested stacks of plastic cups and arranging them into pyramids and back again so quickly the whole thing is almost a blur.
Related content
· From bobsledding to ballroom dancing, how 31 competitive activities score on criteria to decide if they're sports -- or not
It's impressive. It takes skill and agility. But is it a sport?
Stacking supporters think so. In 2005, the governing body changed the name officially to "sport stacking."
"When people challenge me on whether it's a sport, I usually turn it around on them," said Matt Reed, executive director of the World Sport Stacking Association. "I ask them, 'What's your definition of sport?' Invariably many of the things they mention are involved in our sport."
ESPN shows poker, cheerleading, arm wrestling and, yes, sport stacking.
Bass fishing events offer million-dollar purses.
Takeru Kobayashi, hot dog eating champion
Zoom AP
Takeru Kobayashi won Nathan's Famous Hot Dog Eating Competition six years in a row. But is the event an actual sport?
Mainstream newspaper sports sections report on hot dog eating world records.
The Olympics offer medals for kayaking and bobsled, but not for golf or football (at least not the American kind).
Some school districts classify chess as a sport.
So how, in this age of media saturation and fringe activities clamoring for legitimacy, can we define "sport"?
It's one of the great barroom debates, usually triggered by the sight of billiards or the X Games on TV at a watering hole. But while fans have argued over it for decades, there hasn't really been any official effort to define sport.
Rodney Fort, a professor of sport management at the University of Michigan who taught for more than two decades at Washington State University, uses a discussion about the definition of sport as an exercise to get students thinking about the field.
Fort has narrowed his definition to three parameters:
* It must use a "large motor skill."
* It must have an objective scoring system.
* It must use nothing more complicated than a "simple machine," such as a baseball bat or vaulting pole.
"That's just me talking, my personal opinion," Fort said. "You'll never find a group of people who will reach total agreement."
There are many factors to consider, but most arguments end up centering on a few common factors.
Who's got the ball?
A ball helps a lot. Most things with a ball (or ball-like object, such as a puck) are generally considered to be sports. Heck, America's three top pro sports have "ball" right in the name.
If there are two people or teams on a playing surface at the same time competing with a ball, particularly the same ball, it's almost certainly a sport. Dozens of sports fit under this umbrella.
Who's racing?
A footrace is the simplest form of sport, and most racing under human power is inarguably a sport. Whether people are racing over hurdles, through the woods or in a pool, they're engaged in sport.
The question becomes what level of human power you require, and what other implements you accept.
For instance, horse racing might be "the sport of kings," but is it a sport?
"It's a sport for the horse," Fort said. "They're the ones doing the racing. Certainly the jockey has something to do with it, but it's hard to conclude that that's a sport in the same way, say, the 100-meter dash is."
And in horse racing, at least it's the horse that gets the glory. Most people can name horses that have won the Triple Crown, but not jockeys who have done it.
But what about auto racing? NASCAR is one of the most popular sports in America, but it's the cars that are providing the power, and the fastest car usually wins, even if it's not driven by the most skilled driver on a particular day. Purists would reject all motorized racing, though they'd get a powerful argument south of the Mason-Dixon line.
What about human-powered racing in disciplines where differences in the equipment can affect the outcome, such as cycling and crew? Fort rejects these under his "simple machines" provision, but if you set the standard at the conveyance being primarily human powered, pedaling and rowing qualify.
Whose turn is it?
Then there is the question of whether participants must compete head-to-head. In a footrace, first one to the finish wins. But what about races like downhill skiing, in which competitors are theoretically racing each other but really just racing a clock?
Golf and bowling also are turn-based. In the case of bowling, it's to assure two competitors have the same lane conditions, but in golf a field of 144 can experience vastly different conditions on the same course -- some might play a hole early or late, with or without wind or rain. People often complete the same round on different days.
Are the golfers truly competing against each other? And if you could get the same results by having golfers drop by and play four rounds at a certain course at their leisure, and then comparing scores to determine a winner, can a golf tournament be said to be a sporting event?
What's the score?
When the results of a competition are a matter of opinion, it's tough for many to accept it as a sport.
If a judge scores an athlete higher or lower based on politics, or loving or hating a certain move, or, heaven forbid, whether he likes his outfit, the notion of competition goes down the drain quickly.
We like to know for certain whether someone won a contest. The ball went in the net or it didn't. The runner beat the throw to the plate or he didn't. Our most popular sports have this in common, even though human error is sometimes a factor.
"We have to all know what constitutes you getting a point," Fort said. "This causes a problem for some people, because they confuse the existence of an objective scoring definition with the human fallibility of recognizing it when they see it.
"They say, 'Well, what about when a ref blows a call in the end zone?' But that's not the point. We all know what constitutes a touchdown. We're just arguing about whether the ref saw it correctly or not."
Women often argue against the insistence on objective scoring, because it eliminates several sports most closely identified with women, or most popular when women are competing: figure skating, gymnastics, cheer.
But its sweep is much wider than that. Diving, out. Most extreme sports, out. Many rodeo events, out.
Even boxing, considered one of the most basic and pure sports, goes by the wayside if we insist on objective scoring. Are you ready to throw out boxing?
If you want boxing, you pretty much have to accept figure skating.
Getting physical?
Even if you insist on humans doing the competing, head-to-head competition and objective scoring, you're still left with a lot of things that don't pass muster. Pinball. Poker. Darts. Which of your frat brothers can eat the most jalapeno poppers.
There has to be some level of physical effort. But where do you draw the line?
Golf looks pretty easy, but the average person might change his mind on that after playing 18 holes on foot carrying his own bag.
You could argue that throwing a 15-pound bowling ball for a few hours requires more physical strength than swinging a golf club, but a trip to the local bowling alley doesn't exactly turn up a lot of world-class athletes.
Tennis is a sport, but how about table tennis? It's pretty much the same thing, only on a smaller scale -- and if you watch an international match you see that there's some physical effort involved.
Curling is an Olympic medal sport, but requires about the same level of effort as sweeping the back porch.
The question of what is or is not a sport will continue to be argued, and the only point of agreement likely to be reached is that we'll never agree.
What combination of factors must exist to make something a sport is up to you. Or maybe it's like the famous definition of art: You know it when you see it.
"Are we going to be in the Olympics? I don't know about that," cup stacking, er, sport stacking chief Reed said. "We're never going to be one of the major sports, but we feel like we're legit."
For Reed, whether sport stacking is classified as a sport is less important than people having fun doing it.
After all, that's the point, isn't it?
