Haha,geeks wanted chess become sport.hilariouss
So,monopoly should also be sport xd

I don't want I'm just saying what it is lol

nah, i m not saying you want. i m talking in general. I will, personally, never admit that chess is some kind of sport

Quote :

Chess is a two-player board game played on a chessboard, a square-checkered board with 64 squares arranged in an eight-by-eight grid. It is one of the world's most popular game, played by millions of people worldwide at home, in clubs, online, by correspondence, and in tournaments.

Direct pull from Wikipedia.

Didn't notice but yes it is xD

Chess. Is. A. Fukken. Game.
Dota is sport. Football is sport. If you really wanted you could make poker a sport (but nah, that's not going to happen either). But chess is a fukken game and will never get into sports.

Ok now you are acting like me about lol sage xD
Chess has been a sport long time

It's totally different.
I play chess too. I play hockeyball as well. And some other active things (like ju-jitsu). So I'm just pointing out, that chess is not a sport.
Chess is a game (some explanation can be found in my second post in this thread) and the fact that they have tournaments there doesn't make it a sport. Sport requires some physical abilities from players, which chess doesn't. You only need to think about your move, it doesn't matter how will you make it. That's what makes chess "only" a game. In every sport you have to execute your move in real-time and with some controlled body movement (like kicking the ball in the right place at the right time and in the right direction so it flies to the goal).
Chess will never be a sport unless they introduce some totally new mechanic into it

God your stubborn
I give up on you and telling that chess is a sport because you don't accept it .
Have fun telling people that chess isn't a sport and getting laughed at.

You just tell something without any arguments or any back-up. Good luck with that.
After several explanations, wikipedia pull and another explanations I thought I made clear that chess is a GAME. It is played competitively, but that doesn't make it a SPORT.

Please someone tell me who is more stubborn: me or him?

Link
This is my fucking last post about chess

WIKIPEDIA wrote:

The first official World Chess Champion, Wilhelm Steinitz, claimed his title in 1886; the current World Champion is Viswanathan Anand from India. In addition to the World Championship, there are the Women's World Championship, the Junior World Championship, the World Senior Championship, the Correspondence Chess World Championship, the World Computer Chess Championship, and Blitz and Rapid World Championships. The Chess Olympiad is a popular competition among teams from different nations. Online chess has opened amateur and professional competition to a wide and varied group of players. Chess is a recognized sport of the International Olympic Committee, and international chess competition is sanctioned by the FIDE (Fédération Internationale des Échecs or World Chess Federation). There are also many chess variants that have different rules, different pieces, and different boards.

Read the whole post in wikipedia -.-

That's fine. If olympics regocnize it as sport, it's their thing.
I told you what makes sport for me and that chess is never going to make it in the same category that "active" sports are.
If you think chess is a sport, then even stuff like swimming is a sport.
BUT that means by sport you take any competitive activity. WHICH is then divided into disciplines (swimming 100m, jumping etc), games (chess, poker, etc) and active sports (footbal, dota, etc).
You could at least try to read what I write instead of just responding to the first words you see. Because I always arguments then I type and I expect people to respond to them, otherwise there is no discussion and we can just flame like crazy. The whole "but-they-said-it" thing just doesn't work on me.

Sports also needs fast thinking, not always physical means.
Fast thinking is Applied in Board games, i.e. Chess

God you gotta be kidding me...
swimming is also a beeping sport
I give up seriously I got better stuff in life then tell you what's a sport
P.S. you never said to me

umad at sage bro?

Nah, it's just undescribable what he says about chess and swimming xD

If you interfere in a discussion, it is expected you already know the topic and read what has been written before. Otherwise you are just an ignorant punk who likes to say his opinion. Which is cool, don't think I have something agains that type of people. But that's not a discussion.
After I several times showed a clear distintion between what I consider (active) sports and what are games (i never explained disciplines, but you should be able to figure that out by yourself), YOU MUST REALIZE THAT EVERY CONVERSATION IS DEPENDED ON THE WORDS USED AND WHEN SOMEONE ELSE IS SAYING SOMETHING THAT DOESNT FIT YOUR PERCEPTION OF REALITY, IT MEANS THAT HE IS JUST USING DIFFERENT WORDS FOR THE SAME THINGS.
If you fail to understand that, then also know that human language is unable to fully descripe every aspect of our percieved reality and similiar things lead to further misunderstandings. And that will cause you huge troubles later in life.
Banebu, I have nothing agaist you personally, you just can't discuss properly. You can only repeat the same shit over and over again without any real response to the arguments used. So I really don't know why are you even trying to say something.

Quote :

Sports also needs fast thinking, not always physical means.
Fast thinking is Applied in Board games, i.e. Chess

that can go for anything. even for math exams.
The real difference in thinking in sports (also active by my description) and thinking in other types (games and disciplines) is that you have to react in the very moment your opponent makes his move, but in addition to that you need to think how are you going to use your body. Of course you can make something like that in chess but that completely changes the game itself.
Besides, in chess you can get to the same situation more times, because the board and its rules are "too tight". I'm not saying it happens to people in lifetime, but it is actually and mathematically possible to see the same game twice. Which in sports is not possible because they have to react in real world which doesn't have exact moves (meaning you can't pass the ball always in the same way).
And because of all that, you can calculate every possible move in chess. Which isn't very "sporty".

I'm not mad, but if you really want to discuss, please use a commonly used way - say why are my arguments wrong or why my words used aren't coherent with the reality (from your perception) and then say your point of view.
If you just want to stump with "BUT THAT THING IS LIEK THIS".... I don't know who is more mad.

I seriously question your intelect level sometimes -.-

It was 136 2 years ago if you must know

I had over 140 when I was at your age. But I'm not asking about IQ, that shit means nothing.

Quote :

IQ is the most researched approach to intelligence and by far the most widely used in practical setting. However, although IQ attempts to measure some notion of intelligence, it may fail to act as an accurate measure of "intelligence" in its broadest sense. IQ tests only examine particular areas embodied by the broadest notion of "intelligence", failing to account for certain areas which are also associated with "intelligence"

That about sums up what I think about IQ. But you still can't process simple arguments I used to don't give me all that butt-hurt "you cant accept truth" shit. You have no idea what the word "truth" really means or how it affects facts. So if you are unable to discuss, don't do it.
You are right and I even said that myself in my posts, but since you don't read them, well who gives a shit anyway.

This Sage is guy is hilarious...even when his argument falls apart he keeps going.

First he says Chess isn't a sport because Wikipedia says so. Already a very poor argument. Then, Bane uses THE EXACT SAME LOGIC to prove that Chess is a sport, because Wikipedia said it. However, apparently Wikipedia is only a reliable source if Sage is quoting it.

Then instead of providing a real counterpoint, he questions Bane's intellect. This is quality comedic material. And I'm sure Sage will tell me everything I just said was wrong, so that statement should be pretty funny too.

CakesPicasso wrote:

This Sage is guy is hilarious...even when his argument falls apart he keeps going.

First he says Chess isn't a sport because Wikipedia says so. Already a very poor argument. Then, Bane uses THE EXACT SAME LOGIC to prove that Chess is a sport, because Wikipedia said it. However, apparently Wikipedia is only a reliable source if Sage is quoting it.

Then instead of providing a real counterpoint, he questions Bane's intellect. This is quality comedic material. And I'm sure Sage will tell me everything I just said was wrong, so that statement should be pretty funny too.

Dude, did you even read my posts? Or you just quick-read them and hoooraaaayyy to react?
No I never said I believe in Wikipedia. I just posted the part for banebu's sake. He said use google, so I used it.
Apparently you missed the buttload of text around it where I used ACTUAL logic and built my arguments using it. But hey, who cares about that, right?

Quote :

...instead of providing a real counterpoint, he questions Bane's intellect

I stated my own counterpoints in that huge wall of text which you probably didn't even read, but hey, it's all for fun, why should you read if you don't want to. If you don't want to read, refer to my sig and rule #3.
I know banebu doesn't read my posts, because my style is kind of boring and thorough, but if you don't do it either, don't expect me to actually respond, because you won't read it anyway.

It's unbelievably amusing that you can't fathom someone disagreeing with you and being intelligent at the same time. "He didn't agree with me!? Oh, he must not have read anything I said!" You didn't need to say you believed in Wikipedia, using it to prove a point already tells us that you do. You can use all the text you want, but I really wouldn't call your style "thorough." Your argument was never really built, you just kept repeating that Chess and Swimming are not sports, and that you will never agree that they are. Oh, and that Bane doesn't read. You said that a lot too.

[quote=sage]I know banebu doesn't read my posts, because my style is kind of boring and thorough, but if you don't do it either, don't expect me to actually respond, because you won't read it anyway.[/quote]

This part is not true I read every single word in this thread by you from top to bottom twice

CakesPicasso wrote:

It's unbelievably amusing that you can't fathom someone disagreeing with you and being intelligent at the same time. "He didn't agree with me!? Oh, he must not have read anything I said!" You didn't need to say you believed in Wikipedia, using it to prove a point already tells us that you do. You can use all the text you want, but I really wouldn't call your style "thorough." Your argument was never really built, you just kept repeating that Chess and Swimming are not sports, and that you will never agree that they are. Oh, and that Bane doesn't read. You said that a lot too.

It's a huge difference between disagreeing with what I wrote and with what you read. I didn't even use it to prove my point, I just followed his advice (because I read his post thoroughly and completely, much like he said he does with mine posts). If you think that was a "huge point", then please, don't respond anymore.
I repeat stuff because every time I write something, noone replies to that part, just focuses on the stupidiest parts (which are included just to see what exactly are you focusing on). If you actually read everything I wrote, you would know what I consider sports, how I separated them and where exactly have I put swimming and chess. And also I wrote something about people who don't see that I actually agree with them but they don't see it because of their own (I don't know how to call it anymore) fault.
I'm sorry that you fail to see something that simple, but at least you don't worry much in your life which is a huge plus. And believe me, I know what I'm talking about.