Things you always wanted to know the answer to [Vol. 3]
Discussion
popeyewhite said:
SpeckledJim said:
Yes, the skill is enjoyable in both activities.
But the measurement is important to something qualifying as a proper sport.
Hmmm. Define "proper sport". Surely jogging is a proper sport. What about going out for a bike ride? How about a kickabout with your mates in the park?But the measurement is important to something qualifying as a proper sport.
What about aesthetic sports? Ballroom dancing for instance/gymnastics etc? Sure there are skills that have to be included, but measurement is based on judges' opinion, not any objective scoring system.
Jogging: Not a sport. Road-running competitively: proper sport.
Bike ride: not a sport. Bike racing: proper sport
Kick-about in the park: might be a sport depending on if you're counting goals and playing to some rules.
Aesthetic sports with judges impartially equating performance into a score is real sport. Although I'd argue it's not quite as 'genuine' as sports with a less interpretive basis for scoring.
popeyewhite said:
SpeckledJim said:
Without the measurement aspect, there's no competition.
I've made no comment about competition, but if I were to I'd note that simply one person arriving somewhere before another could be described as competitive. And of course you don't need a winner for sport to be competitive.Just some musings... .
You do need a winner (or a competition to end in a draw) for it to be competitive and/or a sport.
Edited to correct quoting, sorry.
Edited by SpeckledJim on Tuesday 19th September 12:22
SpeckledJim said:
Jogging: Not a sport. Road-running competitively: proper sport.
Bike ride: not a sport. Bike racing: proper sport
Kick-about in the park: might be a sport depending on if you're counting goals and playing to some rules.
But surely that also meansBike ride: not a sport. Bike racing: proper sport
Kick-about in the park: might be a sport depending on if you're counting goals and playing to some rules.
Golf as a way of spending an afternoon having some fun with a few mates: not a sport
Golf competitively: sport
RizzoTheRat said:
SpeckledJim said:
Jogging: Not a sport. Road-running competitively: proper sport.
Bike ride: not a sport. Bike racing: proper sport
Kick-about in the park: might be a sport depending on if you're counting goals and playing to some rules.
But surely that also meansBike ride: not a sport. Bike racing: proper sport
Kick-about in the park: might be a sport depending on if you're counting goals and playing to some rules.
Golf as a way of spending an afternoon having some fun with a few mates: not a sport
Golf competitively: sport
If at the end of the round there's a winner, then it was sport.
If everyone just played their own game without reference to each other, then it's just practice, really.
If I go for a round of golf on my own, play to the rules, and keep score, then it fails the sport test because there's no winner, no competition. Unless we accept a woolly 'I was competing against my personal best' definition, which would then be ok.
RizzoTheRat said:
SpeckledJim said:
Jogging: Not a sport. Road-running competitively: proper sport.
Bike ride: not a sport. Bike racing: proper sport
Kick-about in the park: might be a sport depending on if you're counting goals and playing to some rules.
But surely that also meansBike ride: not a sport. Bike racing: proper sport
Kick-about in the park: might be a sport depending on if you're counting goals and playing to some rules.
Golf as a way of spending an afternoon having some fun with a few mates: not a sport
Golf competitively: sport
Is a question still debated by a lot of people. Bowls in the Olympics: Competitive by SJ's standard? - Yes. Proper sport? - Hmmm.
popeyewhite said:
RizzoTheRat said:
SpeckledJim said:
Jogging: Not a sport. Road-running competitively: proper sport.
Bike ride: not a sport. Bike racing: proper sport
Kick-about in the park: might be a sport depending on if you're counting goals and playing to some rules.
But surely that also meansBike ride: not a sport. Bike racing: proper sport
Kick-about in the park: might be a sport depending on if you're counting goals and playing to some rules.
Golf as a way of spending an afternoon having some fun with a few mates: not a sport
Golf competitively: sport
Is a question still debated by a lot of people. Bowls in the Olympics: Competitive by SJ's standard? - Yes. Proper sport? - Hmmm.
It involves physical skill and dexterity, has rules and strategies, and at the end there's a winner and a loser.
The one I struggle to accept as a sport is chess. Because you can play just as well down the phone as in person, so I would argue there's no physical component to chess, so it's not a proper sport. A brain in a jar has no disadvantage in chess as long as someone will move his piece for him.
I quite like, but don't completely agree with, the simple rule of thumb that it's not a sport if you don't have to change your shoes.
SpeckledJim said:
If I go for a round of golf on my own, play to the rules, and keep score, then it fails the sport test because there's no winner, no competition. Unless we accept a woolly 'I was competing against my personal best' definition, which would then be ok.
But then is training for a sport not a sport? If you go out for a round of golf on your own, or even go to a driving range or putting green, in order to try and improve your technique before a competitive match with your mates, is that still sport?I run home from work on my own, I'm not competing against anyone (ignoring the fact that part of the route is a Strava segment) so does that mean it's not some form of sport? But if I don't run in the week I'll be a lot slower at parkrun (which officially isn't a race but I'm competing against my own times so happy to call that a sport) at the weekend, and die on my arse when the cross country league starts up next month.
In some ways doesn't that make chess more of a sport than other, more traditional sports? Open to all comers, anybody can take it up and compete in it.
Not claiming that to be the case, just putting it out there.
With regard to golf, I'm utterly hopeless at it. I don't have time to play very often; maybe three or four times a year so when I do play it's either on my own or with people who are vastly superior to me. I consider it a good round if I shoot under 115 and lose two or fewer balls. There's absolutely no point whatsoever in competing but I enjoy it for some peace and quiet in the fresh air, a bit of gentle exercise and maybe a pint or two afterwards. Lessons would be a bit of a waste of time and money for me as I wouldn't have the time to enjoy their benefits but I would definitely get some if I could play every week as the feeling of hitting a 250 yard drive straight down the fairway or dropping straight onto the green of a par three on the occasions that I manage it is very satisfying indeed.
This thread has been quite enjoyable but to me it boils down to the old cliché of "to each their own."
Not claiming that to be the case, just putting it out there.
With regard to golf, I'm utterly hopeless at it. I don't have time to play very often; maybe three or four times a year so when I do play it's either on my own or with people who are vastly superior to me. I consider it a good round if I shoot under 115 and lose two or fewer balls. There's absolutely no point whatsoever in competing but I enjoy it for some peace and quiet in the fresh air, a bit of gentle exercise and maybe a pint or two afterwards. Lessons would be a bit of a waste of time and money for me as I wouldn't have the time to enjoy their benefits but I would definitely get some if I could play every week as the feeling of hitting a 250 yard drive straight down the fairway or dropping straight onto the green of a par three on the occasions that I manage it is very satisfying indeed.
This thread has been quite enjoyable but to me it boils down to the old cliché of "to each their own."
Dr Jekyll said:
A sport can be defined as an enoyable pastime without necessarily being competitive, as in sports car. That's why we have the Olympic games not the Olympic sports.
I know what you mean, there's a loose definition of the word that means, essentially, anything you do for fun."I just rearrange the crap in my garage every month for sport. It keeps me busy."
I'm not denying that's a valid use of the word, but I think it's not the same idea as the specific idea of 'sports' per se.
RizzoTheRat said:
SpeckledJim said:
If I go for a round of golf on my own, play to the rules, and keep score, then it fails the sport test because there's no winner, no competition. Unless we accept a woolly 'I was competing against my personal best' definition, which would then be ok.
But then is training for a sport not a sport? If you go out for a round of golf on your own, or even go to a driving range or putting green, in order to try and improve your technique before a competitive match with your mates, is that still sport?I run home from work on my own, I'm not competing against anyone (ignoring the fact that part of the route is a Strava segment) so does that mean it's not some form of sport? But if I don't run in the week I'll be a lot slower at parkrun (which officially isn't a race but I'm competing against my own times so happy to call that a sport) at the weekend, and die on my arse when the cross country league starts up next month.
Taking the improvements in your fitness that you get from running home from work and using that to compete in a race at the weekend would be sport.
Weight-lifting is part of a sprinter's training, and running might be part of a weight-lifter's training, but no part of the sport of weight-lifting is a component of the sport of sprinting, and vice versa.
If someone is asked 'do you do any sports', and they reply 'skiing', that always twitches my gland, because inevitably they've never been in a single ski race in their lives, and what they mean is that they like the activity of skiing, but don't compete.
People have tried to re-define what is 'sport' many times. Some have suggested a level of calorie expenditure, others whether a certain heart rate is exceeded or even whether sweat is broken. Personally I don't see bowls, chess or darts as sport. I think a certain amount of physical effort has to be involved and therefore a level of fitness required.
kowalski655 said:
TTmonkey said:
Why is golf played over 18 holes anyway? Why not 10, or 15 or 20...?
Is probably the better question 
SpeckledJim said:
If someone is asked 'do you do any sports', and they reply 'skiing', that always twitches my gland, because inevitably they've never been in a single ski race in their lives, and what they mean is that they like the activity of skiing, but don't compete.
Skiing is very clearly a sport whether competition is entered or not. It could be argued that you're always competing against yourself anyway!What about boxing? Millions don't compete - would you say boxing training is just an 'activity' and not a sport?
They're ill defined terms, but I'm not convinced that anything that depends on whether someone is keeping score during exactly the same activity is particularly meaningful. Does it matter whether the challenge is the rock face or your own personal best or the judging panel or the other guy?
popeyewhite said:
SpeckledJim said:
If someone is asked 'do you do any sports', and they reply 'skiing', that always twitches my gland, because inevitably they've never been in a single ski race in their lives, and what they mean is that they like the activity of skiing, but don't compete.
Skiing is very clearly a sport whether competition is entered or not. It could be argued that you're always competing against yourself anyway!What about boxing? Millions don't compete - would you say boxing training is just an 'activity' and not a sport?
For me, and for the dictionary, a sport has
- Physical activity and dexterity
- Rules
- Strategies
- Winners and losers.
- An element of fun or entertainment. e.g. shop-keeping isn't a sport.
If you're boxing against someone, then that's a sport. Perhaps the ultimate sport.
If you're just hitting pads, then that's exercise.
I hear all the time about people buying dodgy cars or other goods from businesses who are given court orders to re-imburse the customer, but instead just shut down and re-open under a different name. Apparently this makes the court order unenforceable.
Just curious how exactly this works? Is it genuinely as simple as closing down "Quality Automobiles" and opening "Quality Cars"?
Are there no repercussions for the business owners?
Just curious how exactly this works? Is it genuinely as simple as closing down "Quality Automobiles" and opening "Quality Cars"?
Are there no repercussions for the business owners?
a said:
Are there no repercussions for the business owners?
Not if they're separate Ltd companies. If they're personally disqualified as a Director that has repercussions but not too difficult to get Directors from other family members/associates. Rinse & repeat for the shameless. Limited Companies are a good thing in principle but like most things in life, some will exploit the characteristics. What is the most complex activity that an average human can learn to perform without thinking?
I mean, a stone-age man whose most complex activity was say daubing a picture of a bison on his cave wall had the same brainpower as a modern man who can - with a bit of practice - ride a unicycle, play a piano concerto or pilot a jet fighter.
So what is the most complex task that a human can be taught to perform?
I mean, a stone-age man whose most complex activity was say daubing a picture of a bison on his cave wall had the same brainpower as a modern man who can - with a bit of practice - ride a unicycle, play a piano concerto or pilot a jet fighter.
So what is the most complex task that a human can be taught to perform?
Ayahuasca said:
What is the most complex activity that an average human can learn to perform without thinking?
I mean, a stone-age man whose most complex activity was say daubing a picture of a bison on his cave wall had the same brainpower as a modern man who can - with a bit of practice - ride a unicycle, play a piano concerto or pilot a jet fighter.
So what is the most complex task that a human can be taught to perform?
I'd be surprised if anything we can outwardly perform would be anywhere near as complex as all the unconscious things the brain already does to keep us alive. Millions of messages and actions every minute, pretty-much all without thinking.I mean, a stone-age man whose most complex activity was say daubing a picture of a bison on his cave wall had the same brainpower as a modern man who can - with a bit of practice - ride a unicycle, play a piano concerto or pilot a jet fighter.
So what is the most complex task that a human can be taught to perform?
Anyone know what the computing power of the brain is like, compared to, say, a top-end laptop?
Ayahuasca said:
What is the most complex activity that an average human can learn to perform without thinking?
I mean, a stone-age man whose most complex activity was say daubing a picture of a bison on his cave wall had the same brainpower as a modern man who can - with a bit of practice - ride a unicycle, play a piano concerto or pilot a jet fighter.
So what is the most complex task that a human can be taught to perform?
Parking straight and equal between two parallel white linesI mean, a stone-age man whose most complex activity was say daubing a picture of a bison on his cave wall had the same brainpower as a modern man who can - with a bit of practice - ride a unicycle, play a piano concerto or pilot a jet fighter.
So what is the most complex task that a human can be taught to perform?
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff