Chief Delphi - Is a FIRST Team equal to a traditional sports team?

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)

- General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)

- - Is a FIRST Team equal to a traditional sports team? (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=137092)

Re: Is a FIRST Team equal to a traditional sports team?

Quote:

Originally Posted by highlander (Post 1479727)

I have to disagree. Your definition for sport is very off. Certainly all of the above are competitions, but having something where you compete simply doesn't mean its a sport.

Are marching bands a sport?
Is chess a sport?
Are math competitions a sport?
Is juggling a sport?
Do eating competitions qualify as sports?
Is the lottery a sport?

All of the above have winners, but most would not qualify as sports. Where do you draw the line? Simply having a winner isn't a sufficient answer.

What do poker, eating competitions, NASCAR, golf, and FRC all have in common?

They've ALL been shown on various SPORTS networks on TV. Yes, even FRC (ESPN, 1996 or so?--before my time at any rate). Thus, either certain SPORTS network executives need to rebrand their networks, or the networks need to find new executives, or those are all sports.

And just to drive the point home, you just called an Olympic sport not a sport. (Golf, for the record.) If you're going to go that route, might I also suggest removing archery and other shooting sports (other than biathalon, which involves skiing) from the sports list?

Now, some of that list I'd have to agree on (the lottery, possibly juggling, chess, and most likely math competitions), but then you've got to figure out why those aren't and all the other stuff is.

Re: Is a FIRST Team equal to a traditional sports team?

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1479738)

1. I never said anything about Golf not being a sport, sorry if you misunderstood.

2. ESPN and other sporting networks are not bound by any means to show exclusively sporting events. ESPN shows whatever brings in the most value for them. In those cases, dramatizing competitions is not a far cry from sports, and doesn't stray from their target market too much, so they broadcast those events. I can't buy your logic in saying that ESPN declares which events are 'sports', and which aren't.

3. In my personal opinion, I wouldn't define any of the examples I listed as sports. However, I was simply rebutting the point and since you are the proponent of the original argument, the impetus is on you to define where you draw the line.

Re: Is a FIRST Team equal to a traditional sports team?

Quote:

Originally Posted by highlander (Post 1479727)

[...]
Is chess a sport?
[...]
All of the above have winners, but most would not qualify as sports. Where do you draw the line? Simply having a winner isn't a sufficient answer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1479738)

[...]
Now, some of that list I'd have to agree on (the lottery, possibly juggling, chess, and most likely math competitions), but then you've got to figure out why those aren't and all the other stuff is.

From Wikipedia:

Quote:

Chess is a recognized sport of the International Olympic Committee and international chess competition is sanctioned by the World Chess Federation (FIDE), which adopted the now-standard Staunton chess set in 1924 for use in all official games.

Chess is recognized by the IOC as a sport, although it is not part of the Olympic Games.

Sources:
http://www.olympic.org/content/the-i...ons/?tab=arisf
http://www.arisf.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic...ognized_sports

Re: Is a FIRST Team equal to a traditional sports team?

Quote:

Originally Posted by highlander (Post 1479742)

1. I never said anything about Golf not being a sport, sorry if you misunderstood.

Saying that "all of the above are competitions" (referring to three items including GOLF) "but that doesn't necessarily mean they're sports" sure comes close to saying they aren't sports.

Quote:

2. ESPN and other sporting networks are not bound by any means to show exclusively sporting events. ESPN shows whatever brings in the most value for them. In those cases, dramatizing competitions is not a far cry from sports, and doesn't stray from their target market too much, so they broadcast those events. I can't buy your logic in saying that ESPN declares which events are 'sports', and which aren't.

Let me rephrase that a little bit for you: If those sports networks are showing things that are not sports, and claiming to be sports networks/sports channels, then you, the consumer, have every right to bring a "false advertising" claim. Yes? OK, so they're showing what we think are non-sports competitions. So they think that those events qualify as sports under whatever definition they happen to be using, which I'm pretty sure isn't quite the same as ours.

Quote:

3. In my personal opinion, I wouldn't define any of the examples I listed as sports. However, I was simply rebutting the point and since you are the proponent of the original argument, the impetus is on you to define where you draw the line.

As a matter of fact, I was simply rebutting YOUR point, so I'm afraid you get to draw the line. But, seeing as you went there: Marching band could be a sport: physical exertion, there are competitions involved, there are winners, there is training. Competitive eating is a little more far-fetched--but you still have those same four elements, so I can see the case. Math competitions and the lottery don't really have any physical exertion, so I have a hard time with those. Juggling I'm not even sure has competitions... Chess I'd try the (lack of) physical exertion argument on but I've already been shown that that's recognized as a sport.

I loosely draw the line as follows: some sort of physical exertion, training, and competition with winner(s). If you don't have all of those, the best you can do is "sport of the mind".

Ya know, there's a really easy way to get robotics recognized as a sport. Anybody wanna petition the IOC? :p :rolleyes:

Re: Is a FIRST Team equal to a traditional sports team?

The question was, "Is a FIRST Team equal to a traditional sports team?"

The answer is No. But a better answer is, "No, but why do we even care?"

Traditional sports teams are not equal to other traditional sports teams. Football is not equal to swimming. Basketball is not equal to soccer. That's the way it is, live with it.

The better question is, "Is a FIRST team as respected as other activities?" If the answer to that is No, you have to ask your own team, Why not? You need to work to earn the respect of your fellow students, your faculty and your administrators.

Re: Is a FIRST Team equal to a traditional sports team?

Is a Choir class equal to a Calculus class? How about Bowling vs. Film Study? German Lit vs. Culinary Arts?

Re: Is a FIRST Team equal to a traditional sports team?

Brazenly quoting myself ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by gblake (Post 1479490)

Yes, of course they are equal, in every way you can think of, except for all the ways they are exact opposites.

Is an apple equal to an orange? Is an apple equal to another apple? Is one half of an apple equal to the other half?

I recommend spending your time on other, more important questions, like "Does a submarine swim?"

Or, "How is a traditional sports team like a fish without a bicycle?"

;)
Blake
PS: The swimming submarine is part of a non-trivial discussion...

Re: Is a FIRST Team equal to a traditional sports team?

Quote:

Originally Posted by thatnerdjack (Post 1479493)

I should also probably mention that her main argument was that they don't have the same "atmosphere". Meaning that the people on her rugby team were closer than the people on my FRC team are.

Based on my rugby playing experience I tend to agree with your friend. There is a particular bond that develops in a team where everyone has a specific specialist role which directly contributes to success of the whole. Add in both the physicality of a hard contact sport and the continuous nature of the game, and a very close team atmosphere is the norm not the exception.

Re: Is a FIRST Team equal to a traditional sports team?

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeE (Post 1479933)

There is a particular bond that develops in a team where everyone has a specific specialist role which directly contributes to success of the whole.

Does that not also apply to FRC?

Re: Is a FIRST Team equal to a traditional sports team?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gregor (Post 1479949)

Does that not also apply to FRC?

That part does.
Physical contact sport doesn't (possible exception of 2014 game).

Re: Is a FIRST Team equal to a traditional sports team?

Even by any definition given on this tread, FRC qualifies as a sport.

Time:
For background, I sail for a varsity sailing team which is top 5 in our region and likely top 15 in the country. We have practice for 3.5 hours a day and 9-4 weekend meets. On the other hand, with FRC, we easily can go for 6 hours a day and 8-10 on weekends. In terms of time, FRC wins easily.

Skill:
I think we can all agree that FRC requires just as much if not more skill than whatever sport you play.

Physical Exertion:
Locktite in a bolt ever? Or have to bend metal with a hand brake? Or carry a 120 pound robot on and off the field and position it? There is some physical exertion there. Maybe it doesn't match sports, but it is there.

Atmosphere:
There is a close bond that forms on a sports team, one that a whole FRC team does not get close to. However, the bond between team leaders or the drive team who spend seemingly every waking moment together is something that sports, for me, has never compared to.

However, FRC is not widely recognized as a sport. That is a problem, for everyone involved. I have had arguments about what constitutes a sport many times not even including FRC. And have been told crew, sailing, and FRC are all not sports. The arguments always end up not being about what constitues a sport but rather about the problem humans have with acknowledging the effort and achievements of others. It is somehow threatening for someone else to work harder than you or to have more success than you.

Ninja Edit: Forgot Physical Exertion category