Sports You don't care about

[spartacat_12]

On 8/15/2022 at 2:02 PM, BBTV said:

Fairly certain that lacrosse is way older than hockey, so calling it a rip-off isn't fair.  I don't really think there's too many comparisons between the two, other than they both have goaltenders and allow checking.

 

Interestingly enough, the most popular version of the sport in Canada is box lacrosse, which is played 5 on 5, indoors on a hockey rink with no ice. Growing up I always assumed this was the only version of lacrosse before finding out that field lacrosse pre-dated it.

 

On 8/17/2022 at 9:46 AM, ManillaToad said:

If you ask me, softball isn't a sport unless you do have a beer in your hand

 

 

[ManillaToad]

I never understood the never-ending squabble about what is or isn't a sport. Who cares?

[BrySmalls]

Sports 

[Indigo]

55 minutes ago, BrySmalls said:

Sports 

I think you're in the wrong section, bub. General Design is that way. 

[sky1324]

Is the debate over what is or isn't a sport a sport

[Ferdinand Cesarano]

2 hours ago, ManillaToad said:

I never understood the never-ending squabble about what is or isn't a sport. Who cares?

 

Clearly quite a lot of people care, including myself.

 

It reminds us that the overarching theme in all of human relations is language, and that every conceivable topic of discussion is really a just subset of discussions about language.

[Red Comet]

5 hours ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Clearly quite a lot of people care, including myself.

 

It reminds us that the overarching theme in all of human relations is language, and that every conceivable topic of discussion is really a just subset of discussions about language.

Define the word “is” then.

[Discrim]

Gonna avoid the golf answer, it's been taken.

College basketball is my answer...sure, I know who's usually good, I know some of the more prominent coaches, but I vastly prefer watching NBA games to college.  Ironically, College Hoops 2K7 had one of my favorite dynasty modes.

TBH, if not for the sole pro game I've ever attended being a Bucks game, I probably wouldn't have specified college, just put down basketball.

[harney]

On 8/18/2022 at 5:35 PM, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

Clearly quite a lot of people care, including myself.

 

It reminds us that the overarching theme in all of human relations is language, and that every conceivable topic of discussion is really a just subset of discussions about language.

 

Reminds me of this

[harney]

I don't care for lacrosse. Feels like it's just the scrubs who couldn't hack it on the gridiron.

[logo-maker]

I don't care about American Football.

[AstroCree]

I never cared for MMA and Boxing. It's too barbaric. I find there to be a lack of class or respect from many of the fighters. My circle of friends talk about it all the time but I just cannot bring myself to it. 

[slapshot]

There are athletic competitions, and there are sports. If the activity has a defined set of rules, and the outcome is determined by the participants' performance, it is a sport. If the outcome is arbitrary and determined based on a judge's judgment, it's an athletic competition.

 

Just because the average Joe could do it, doesn't mean it's not a sport. And just because it's an athletic competition DOESN'T mean the participants AREN'T athletes. The average person would likely have a lot pf pulled muscles and injuries unless they trained as much as the professionals.

 

Golf is a sport because it's athletes using a stick to hit a ball with as much precision as possible toward a target. and there is a defined score based on the number of times it takes to hit the ball into the hole, which can also be changed due to illegal acts (penalties).

 

Bowling is a sport because the athletes are rolling a ball to knock down pins. The bowler puts spin on the ball to keep it out of the gutter, and also to aim the ball precisely.

 

Curling is a sport because there are defined rules that determine the scoring, and it requires an aerobic physical activity to determine the outcome. There is definite strategy involved, and the activity of one team can change the result of the opponent.

 

Gymnastics and figure skating are NOT sports - they are athletic competitions, where the outcome can be arbitrary based on a judge's decision. Not different than a slam dunk contest. Those participants ARE athletes, however, because they train hard to perform the activity at peak physical condition.

 

X-games - just like the Olympics, some events are sports (like racing), others are competitions.

 

The gray area is activities like billiards, darts, cornhole, World Team Chase, and a few others.  

[McCall]

Is Polo a real sport, or just something they made up for British people to play in movies and tv to make it look like they actually do other stuff besides drink tea?

[slapshot]

9 hours ago, McCall said:

Is Polo a real sport, or just something they made up for British people to play in movies and tv to make it look like they actually do other stuff besides drink tea?

 

Real sport, although the horses are more athletic than the riders. There is a famous polo club in a neighboring town. Definitely not many participants for people outside the upper class.

[BBTV]

On 8/21/2022 at 8:49 PM, slapshot said:

There are athletic competitions, and there are sports. If the activity has a defined set of rules, and the outcome is determined by the participants' performance, it is a sport. If the outcome is arbitrary and determined based on a judge's judgment, it's an athletic competition.

 

Just because the average Joe could do it, doesn't mean it's not a sport. And just because it's an athletic competition DOESN'T mean the participants AREN'T athletes. The average person would likely have a lot pf pulled muscles and injuries unless they trained as much as the professionals.

 

Golf is a sport because it's athletes using a stick to hit a ball with as much precision as possible toward a target. and there is a defined score based on the number of times it takes to hit the ball into the hole, which can also be changed due to illegal acts (penalties).

 

Bowling is a sport because the athletes are rolling a ball to knock down pins. The bowler puts spin on the ball to keep it out of the gutter, and also to aim the ball precisely.

 

Curling is a sport because there are defined rules that determine the scoring, and it requires an aerobic physical activity to determine the outcome. There is definite strategy involved, and the activity of one team can change the result of the opponent.

 

Gymnastics and figure skating are NOT sports - they are athletic competitions, where the outcome can be arbitrary based on a judge's decision. Not different than a slam dunk contest. Those participants ARE athletes, however, because they train hard to perform the activity at peak physical condition.

 

X-games - just like the Olympics, some events are sports (like racing), others are competitions.

 

The gray area is activities like billiards, darts, cornhole, World Team Chase, and a few others.  

 

I would go a step further and say that to be a "sport", you have to be able to influence the outcome with direct competition against your opponent.

 

For example - a tennis player influences the game by forcing his opponent into mistakes or by overpowering him.  A basketball player can block a shot or steal the ball.  In golf, there's none of that.  You're just playing against yourself, but with others there just for logistical efficiency.  It's a competition, but IMO not a sport.

 

Same with foot racing.  Even though there's defined rules and objective measures, it's still you racing against yourself.  There's no difference whether you had a heat of 8 vs the 8 people sprinting one at a time.  The results are the same.  Therefore, athletic competition, but not a sport.

 

Like anything, there's no absolutes here, and there's going to be holes in this, but in general, that's where I'm at.  

 

Oh - regarding auto racing.  A 'sport' or 'athletic competition' should require an equal playing field, where your success or failure is entirely up to you (or your teammates in a team sport.)  In auto racing, the "equipment" varies so much (and can explode or break down or get a flat tire) so while a driver is undoubtedly a very highly skilled professional, he's more of a jockey than a competitor.  Auto racing is just metal horse racing.

[floydnimrod]

My interest in each sport somewhat waffles over time. As of right now, I can't watch any Cincinnati Reds games, and while I can listen to them on the radio I haven't found the need to do so this year. I had sworn off the NFL but Joe Burrow is just cool as hell and he somewhat reeled me back in. My interest in NASCAR/F1/Indycar is as high as it's ever been. Similar to what someone else said, Cincinnati's arrival to the soccer scene forced that into my overall interest. Having my childhood hockey team be good again sucked me right back into watching hockey every night.

 

I'll also echo what someone else said about the NBA. My team, Memphis, is finally really good, but the game's just seem so tedious. I'd be much more inclined to maintain interest if these was literally an old-time ESPN sportscenter, that just showed the NBA highlights form the previous day. Not a 12-minute condensed game on YouTube, not just one dunk on Twitter I scroll past, just a full-on show dedicated to just that. I'd watch that all day. I did it as a kid and I'd do it again.

 

COVID cancellations kind of threw my whole sports world for a loop and forced me to re-evaluate. I feel like I'm "full" at the moment and don't need anything else in there. I could get into lacrosse, UFC, or cricket but I just don't feel the need. I like watching the Premier League, but I feel like it'd take a back seat if it was on at any other time of day, or it would at least compete with the NFL/NBA/NASCAR for my attention when it's on.

 

I'll watch the majors for golf, and keep an eye on other tournaments as it's the sports league my dad plays the closest attention to, and now my mom will watch it with him on Sundays which I just think is absolutely adorable.

 

With horse racing I'll watch the Triple Crown because those are such an event and the overall history of the whole thing.

 

As much as I love to play, my interest/knowledge of what's happening in tennis has waned to the point that I'll maybe catch the Wimbledon final, but I'll likely be tuning into all of Serena's upcoming matches.

 

College basketball is probably the sport I've attended the most, and it's my favorite overall, but it's on the verge of just being completely ruined at any moment which is such a shame.

[~Bear]

The first sport that came to mind that I truly just don't care about is NASCAR. To me its drivers driving around in a loop for like 3 hours and occasionally there's a car wreck. If I had to watch a motorsport competition, I would rather watch F1 (which the "tracks" are much more interesting imo). This disdain is ironic considering I grew up about 20 minutes from Darlington Raceway, which is the only major sporting event in the area. 

 

I also share the apathy listed here for more single person sports like golf, boxing, MMA, etc. I never really grew up watching them and I can't say I exactly plan to. As was mentioned earlier, I find it easier to be invested in the history of a sport with a team model versus and individual model. 

 

Additionally I haven't really payed attention to the Olympics since Rio in 2016. Maybe it's the awkward times for EST given the past few locations, maybe it's the awful NBC coverage, or maybe it's a lot of the bigger name athletes retiring. I think I watched part of a curling match when I was at a restaurant and that's what they had on the TV and that's all I really saw of this past Winter Olympics, just didn't have a lot of interest. 

[Sport]

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

 

I would go a step further and say that to be a "sport", you have to be able to influence the outcome with direct competition against your opponent.

 

I can't say I disagree, but influencing the outcome with direct competition against your opponent is wide open for interpretation. 

 

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

For example - a tennis player influences the game by forcing his opponent into mistakes or by overpowering him.  A basketball player can block a shot or steal the ball.  In golf, there's none of that.  You're just playing against yourself, but with others there just for logistical efficiency.  It's a competition, but IMO not a sport.

 

Nonsense. You can pressure your opponent into mistakes in golf and players do it all the time. It just happened in the British Open where Cameron Smith forced McIlroy to take risks he otherwise wouldn't have, which resulted in pars instead of birdies, longer putts for birdie that he missed to Smith's birdies. Cameron Smith was able to work the course to his liking, to his advantage to stay ahead, McIlroy on the other hand had to play off-strategy to find strokes and it cost him. If you can put a guy in an uncomfortable spot, add more variables to his head, that's when guys make small problems into big problems. In golf you're not physically stopping him, you can't tackle your opponent, but that's not a prerequisite for any definition of the word "sport". If McIlroy was out at St. Andrews by himself he plays a completely different round of golf. Cameron Smith was directly influencing the outcome by forcing his opponents into uncomfortable situations. Tiger Woods and Jack Nicklaus won 33 majors because they could work their opponents into bad spots better than anyone else. 

 

We're not even getting into how two guys in a pairing are playing the same course while they're watching each other, which leads to all sorts of competing strategy and gamesmanship. If you're playing against Dechambeau you're going to play differently than you would if you're playing against Scottie Scheffler, for example. Same way you call a different game against the Chiefs as you would, say, the Jets. 

 

 

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

Same with foot racing.  Even though there's defined rules and objective measures, it's still you racing against yourself.  There's no difference whether you had a heat of 8 vs the 8 people sprinting one at a time.  The results are the same.  Therefore, athletic competition, but not a sport.

 

I don't see why that matters. Guy A got up every day and trained so he could beat Guy B. Guy B got up every day and trained so he could be beat Guy A. Guy A got out of the block slow on race day, Guy B didn't, Guy B wins. How's that not a sport? Directly competing against your opponent and influencing the outcome by being the faster guy on race day.  

 

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

Like anything, there's no absolutes here, and there's going to be holes in this, but in general, that's where I'm at.  

 

Lots of holes, I'd say. 

 

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

Oh - regarding auto racing.  A 'sport' or 'athletic competition' should require an equal playing field,

where your success or failure is entirely up to you (or your teammates in a team sport.) 

 

Nonsense. That isn't even true of the big team sports. 

 

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

In auto racing, the "equipment" varies so much (and can explode or break down or get a flat tire) so while a driver is undoubtedly a very highly skilled professional, he's more of a jockey than a competitor.  Auto racing is just metal horse racing.

 

Even if that were true, (it's not) it would still be a sport because the players in the game aren't limited to just the drivers. The sport of auto racing is the whole of it. The drivers, the crew chiefs, the team principals, the strategists, the engineers who design the car, the mechanics who build and maintain the car, the pit crew, the finance guys at HQ, the dude who drives the team bus to the next race, everything. You put all that together, you go to a track with your team, and you compete to see which team has the best car by that race's pre-determined rules. Some cars are better, yes, but my quarterback is better than your quarterback. Ferrari has arguably the best car in the field this year in F1 and they're not going to win the championship because their strategists are a bunch of bozos. Cars explode, flat tires, etc? My quarterback's knee exploded. What's the difference? 

 

 

This was my point earlier - why do people feel the need to play Sport Traffic Cop and declare XYZ are sports because of [ARBITRARY REASONING] while LMNOP are merely "athletic games" or whatever dumb :censored:ing made up thing you want to call it instead because of [ARBITRARY REASONING]? It's stupid. If there's competition, if there's a physical skill involved, and if there's strategy then it's a sport. Gymnastics - sport, figure skating - sport, pickle ball - sport. Who cares?

 

[tBBP]

1 hour ago, Sport said:

You can pressure your opponent into mistakes in golf and players do it all the time. It just happened in the British Open where Cameron Smith forced McIlroy to take risks he otherwise wouldn't have, which resulted in pars instead of birdies, longer putts for birdie that he missed to Smith's birdies. Cameron Smith was able to work the course to his liking, to his advantage to stay ahead, McIlroy on the other hand had to play off-strategy to find strokes and it cost him. If you can put a guy in an uncomfortable spot, add more variables to his head, that's when guys make small problems into big problems. In golf you're not physically stopping him, you can't tackle your opponent, but that's not a prerequisite for any definition of the word "sport". If McIlroy was out at St. Andrews by himself he plays a completely different round of golf. Cameron Smith was directly influencing the outcome by forcing his opponents into uncomfortable situations. Tiger Woods and Jack Nicklaus won 33 majors because they could work their opponents into bad spots better than anyone else. 

 

Exhibit A of both the bolded: the 2019 Masters. Even though Tiger Woods was back by (IIRC) about a good four or five strokes going into that Sunday, did y'all see how he had them young boys ahead of them, especially Brooks Keopka, completely shook? The crazy thing is Tiger played the course mostly safe, not taking too many unnecessary risks, but him knowing the course plus all that experience behind him gave him an advantage--and somewhere around the 14th hole, I watched, in successive order, each of the younger guys ahead of Tiger just melt under the pressure of intimidation, knowing that Tiger was charging after them (which really had been Tiger's MO well before 2019). By I think hole sixteen, the tournament was Tiger's to take...and it was a glorious sight to take in.