Re:How AI is changing gymnastics judging
by vladms on Thursday January 25, 2024 @07:22AM
(#39128776)
> Competition is a defining property of ‘sport’.
This requires a reference though. For example:
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/sport
does not exclude non-competition based physical activities from the definition of sport, to quote: "a game, competition, or activity needing physical effort and skill that is played or done according to rules, for enjoyment and/or as a job: ". Definitions might differ from dictionary to dictionary and language to language
Your definition of games assumes an opponent (ex: Rubik's Cube would not fit), so I think it is not ideal.
Overall I think we could just stick to existing definitions and just accept that some competitions are "subjective" (ex: gymnastics, etc.)
I disagree. Competition is a defining property of ‘sport’.
What’s wrong with calling figure skating an art form? Nobody calls ballet or violin playing sports [1], but there are “prices, juries, etc” for them.
I would split various activities in a group where objective measurements are more or less possible (they never fully are) and one where they aren’t.
The first would consist of:
- games, where your opponent has significant influence on your behavior or performance (basketball, judo, billiards, etc). Basically, if you can play defensively, it’s a game.
- sports, where they don’t (archery, skiing, all forms of athletics; I would include the jumping events, even though your opponent’s performance may significantly affect your strategy. Etc.)
The second would be ‘arts’.
[1] if you look at the modern Olympics, painting and other art forms were events at some time, but that, but even then, did people call those sports?