For as long as I have walked on planet earth, the sport versus game debate regularly pops up. David Papineau is the most recent entry into the ongoing debate - at least as it pertains to the Olympics.
While many activities are both games and sports – tennis and golf, for instance – there are also sports that aren’t games – skiing and surfing, say – and games that aren’t sports – snakes and ladders, or chess and bridge, for that matter.
Papineau suggests that to be classified a sport requires a physical exertion. And then to make his point, talks a lot about Chess and Bridge. I get it. But how much ‘physical exertion’?
I have seen people define sport as being something that has a score associated. The refined with ‘immutable’ score - so excluding (say) ballroom dancing. (BTW, if you watch a real pro you will witness physical exertion.) Personally, I like the definition that a friend of mine provided some years ago.
Any ‘game’ that can be played whilst smoking or drinking during the process is not a sport.
I like the definition, because it automatically removes ‘fishing’ and ‘bowling’, but in truth it really doesn’t work. Consider;
The site has been closed down and the material moved to this site for posterity.
The focus today is People First.
If you want to know more - you could do no worse than;
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.