What makes FRC a sport?

[JamesBrown]

Originally Posted by Basel A

Sports are self-absorbed and have no meaning outside themselves. FRC has greater aspirations and influences.

This is baseless and completely inaccurate, as some one who played sports growing up, continues to play a sport at a high level and coaches and has coached youth through college programs I can assure you that sports have influenced many more kids than programs like FIRST have. Any one who thinks that the primary impact of sports on 99% of its participants has anything to do with on field results never has coached or been coached effectively.

Originally Posted by staplemonx

JJ's definition of a sport

team based = check

more that 2 players per side

physical contact between players = check
low to moderate level of scoring = check

(hockey and soccer low scoring, foot ball moderate, basketball high level of scoring)

players and coaches can get penalties = check
Play on the field is fluid = check
Requires skill, practice and luck to win = check

PS i do not think that baseball is a sport. no penalties and not fluid. Tennis is not a sport, no physical contact. Cross country not a sport, no scoring just measurements (time, distance, etc).

Originally Posted by ThaineP

Evidently, the dictionary is wrong. I would define a "sport" as a leisure activity that involves some amount of skill (drawing a little from the archaic version of the word), and FIRST definitely <bias> takes more skill than some other sports. </bias>

My $0.02

You can't change the definition of sport then argue that because of your definition something is a sport, that is clearly crazy way to present a point. Sport is a word in the English language that is well defined, let’s stick to it. Both of your definitions clearly do not include things that are well established as sports and include things that are not.

Originally Posted by EricLeifermann

I would say FIRST is more of a sport of the mind than an actual sport. I have been very active in both physical sports(soccer, football, basketball, etc.) and sports of the mind(FIRST, poker, chess, etc.).

While I love FIRST it doesn't compare to a physical sport in the type of adrenaline you get when competing. Now I'm not saying you/I don't get pumped up and excited and nervous and all that comes with competing but its not the same as working up a sweat and knocking down a game winning 3 pointer or something like that.

FIRST is a sport its just a different form of a sport.

Sports by definition require physical exertion. What you are calling sports of the mind are games or competitions. While sports can also frequently be considered games or competitions they are not the same thing.

Originally Posted by EricH

If poker is a sport (look, it's shown on both ESPN and FSN), then robotics, where you lift weights (robot parts) and carry them, and where you throw things to try to hit targets, is a sport.

Or, to put it another way: It's a sport where you build your own athlete.

I am assuming you aren't serious but in case you were or other people thought you were something being on a Sports Network does not in its self qualify it as being a sport, nor does something not being on a sports network disqualify it.

Originally Posted by kws4000

FRC is a sport of the mind. I have been in Cross-Country & Track and it is also more of a sport of the mind, but just as much of the body. You need the head to keep going, the body will naturally go along.

Sports are by definition physical (see every dictionary definition quoted so far. Sports also require a huge amount of mental strength, regardless of the sport. In a game like football, rugby or basketball, the mental aspect of strategy is obvious. What isn't obvious is the mental aspect of execution, both in sport like football and in sports like XC, Swimming, and Weightlifting. I can tell you (and I know a few other mentors on here have lifted competitively) that even something that should allow you to be as dumb as lifting a weight can be incredibly mentally draining, lose focus for an instant and there is no way to succeed.

Originally Posted by Laaba 80

I see no reason why an individual seasons game should not be considered a sport.

It is important to remember the differences between games and sports, in this case the lack of physical exertion is certainly one of them.

Originally Posted by torihoelscher

FRC is a sport because it uses your mind. Your mind is getting a workout, it doesn’t entirely have to be a physical type of activity. Its strategy, thats what makes it a sport because without strategy in baseball, football, golf, cross country, and etc there would be no way to win the game. I think its a sport because like other sports you cheer and get adrenaline running through you and we do compete. Heck, when I write software my hands shake with adrenaline.

Robotics is a sport no if, ands, or buts about it.

There are plenty of ifs ands and buts about it. Strategy is without a doubt important to sports but it is not what makes it a sport. Physical effort and/or exertion are by definition part of what makes something a sport.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by JamesBrown

I am assuming you aren't serious but in case you were or other people thought you were something being on a Sports Network does not in its self qualify it as being a sport, nor does something not being on a sports network disqualify it.

But what it DOES mean is that someone thinks that it qualifies as a sport. Someone who makes the programming decisions for that network/channel. You're right, I fail to understand how poker is a sport... but someone higher-up on both the named networks thinks it counts as one for whatever reason. Poker's physical exertion? Well, how much work does it take to put cards on the table?

[mathking]

Sports by definition require physical exertion.

This really depends on the definition you use for sport. In looking at a total of 16 definitions from the 4 dictionaries in my office, 14 mention physical activity but only 3 mention exertion.

The thing is, what is a sport is NOT really well defined. Most of us take an "I know it when I see it" approach. It is in fact really difficult to write a definition of sport that includes everything that a lot of people assume are sports and excludes what a lot of people think are not sports. Is golf a sport? How about competitive shooting? Both require physical activity, but not really exertion. (This reminds me of a cartoon my dad had on his office wall for the better part of two decades: A pair of golfers, with the title "Existential Golf" and the tag line "It is a sport, therefor we are athletes.")

As for the sports bashing. Again folks, why? If you think that big time college and professional sports have a negative influence on our society, that's one thing. Bashing sports in general as useless is another. I will tell you that I coach robotics, cross-country and track & field now (and have coached a variety of other sports) and most of the benefits I see from one I see from the others: learning the value of hard work, seeing the benefits of hard work, learning how to work in a team, learning to take personal responsibility for your actions, understanding the importance of getting your work in the classroom done and done well. Perhaps the most important lesson is learning to seek intrinsic rather than extrinsic motivation.

[JamesBrown]

Originally Posted by JamesCH95

I mean this as an honest question: have you ever been a student driver?

I thought that being a driver was physically demanding. It certainly got my heart rate up and exercised my circulatory system. Picking up and moving the robot over and over is quite an exercise, although arguably a side-effect of FRC and not directly part of the competition.

Yes, I have driven and coached.

Calling picking up ~1/2 of a 140lb robot and moving it <50ft maybe 50 times over the course of a couple of days is really pushing the definition of "quite an exercise" I think that you are really stretching here.

Originally Posted by EricH

But what it DOES mean is that someone thinks that it qualifies as a sport. Someone who makes the programming decisions for that network/channel. You're right, I fail to understand how poker is a sport... but someone higher-up on both the named networks thinks it counts as one for whatever reason. Poker's physical exertion? Well, how much work does it take to put cards on the table?

No, it means that some one thought that they could sell advertising by playing it on their network. There are no FCC guidelies stating that something on a sports network must be a sport. If the network's target demographic will watch it then the network will put it on.

Originally Posted by mathking

This really depends on the definition you use for sport. In looking at a total of 16 definitions from the 4 dictionaries in my office, 14 mention physical activity but only 3 mention exertion.

How many of these refer to what we are actually talking about? The english language is inherently complicated but I think we could knock out a bunch of those definitions pretty quickly.

[JamesCH95]

Originally Posted by JamesBrown

Yes, I have driven and coached.

Calling picking up ~1/2 of a 140lb robot and moving it <50ft maybe 50 times over the course of a couple of days is really pushing the definition of "quite an exercise" I think that you are really stretching here.

You're right, that is not a large amount of exercise. It was a bad expression to use.

It is, however, still physical exertion. It may not be a lot of exertion, but it is still expending energy.

[mathking]

Originally Posted by JamesBrown

How many of these refer to what we are actually talking about? The english language is inherently complicated but I think we could knock out a bunch of those definitions pretty quickly.

I was actually only counting the definitions that pertained to what we are talking about. My point is not that robotics is a sport, or that it isn't. (I tend to come down on the "isn't" side, but don't think the distinction is that important.) My point is that it is very hard to come up with a definition of sport that includes and excludes everything one thinks should be included or excluded. I have actually used writing a definition of sport to include and exclude certain activities as an exercise in class when teaching about the difficulty you can run into when writing specifications.

To illustrate my point, take the number one Dictionary.com definition:
"an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature, as racing, baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, etc."
OK, if you extend "athletic activity" to include hunting and fishing, I think you can make a pretty good argument that operating a robot (and often being a human player) as is done in FRC competition fits the definition.

One of the natural tendencies at this point is to move more toward one of the OED definitions: "an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment" and to argue that say fishing doesn't require much real physical exertion. But a lot of people in this camp argue that something like NASCAR is not a sport, but race car driving involves a lot of physical exertion, more than a lot of activities which seem safely in the "sport" camp.

I loved the discussion in my class last year on this topic. It really engaged my students' critical thinking and argumentation skills.

I think my biggest argument against FRC being a sport is that only a handful of members of the team actually do any of the physical things to operate the robot (or fling the game elements) in competition. On the other hand, I still consider the football players who only practice and never get in a game to be athletes. And at least one person in this thread doesn't believe that one of the sports I coach and played in both HS and college (cross country) is a sport.

[Thundrio]

I have been hearing a lot about the definition of a sport lately, and it's an interesting topic.

For anybody interested in going deeper into this topic, there are some very interesting discussions happening about this topic but applied to Starcraft 2 (thread is at http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/view...pic_id=288621), and I guess e-sports in general. For anybody who doesn't know, the real times strategy game Starcraft 2 is a growing e-sport (electronic sport) that has many professional players and tournaments with $50,000+ prize pools.

Personally I think in the most literal sense of the term FRC is not a sport, rather it is a competition (along with Starcraft). But it's an incredibly complicated topic that would take a while to cover thoroughly (I wish I hadn't already done my Senior research paper ~-~)

[Laaba 80]

Originally Posted by JamesBrown

It is important to remember the differences between games and sports, in this case the lack of physical exertion is certainly one of them.

It is true that humans have no physical exertion during the game, but the robots are clearly physically exerting themselves. The robots are the athletes.

[JamesBrown]

Originally Posted by Laaba 80

It is true that humans have no physical exertion during the game, but the robots are clearly physically exerting themselves. The robots are the athletes.

Robots are not athletes. An athlete by definition is a person, our robots are equipment for playing a game, they are no closer to being athletes than a race car, a bike, or a pair of running shoes.

[Laaba 80]

Originally Posted by JamesBrown

Robots are not athletes. An athlete by definition is a person, our robots are equipment for playing a game, they are no closer to being athletes than a race car, a bike, or a pair of running shoes.

An athlete is a person by definition, but this definition was created far before robots were capable of being "athletes". In breakaway, the robot must move, possess the ball, shoot the ball, pass the ball, etc all on its own power. The same things a human soccer "athlete" must do. Race cars and bikes are both for the sole purpose of transporting the person in the sport, they dont also need to interact with a ball, or whatever other game piece. I guess we can agree to disagree.

[JamesBrown]

Originally Posted by Laaba 80

An athlete is a person by definition, but this definition was created far before robots were capable of being "athletes". In breakaway, the robot must move, possess the ball, shoot the ball, pass the ball, etc all on its own power. The same things a human soccer "athlete" must do. Race cars and bikes are both for the sole purpose of transporting the person in the sport, they dont also need to interact with a ball, or whatever other game piece. I guess we can agree to disagree.

Put an FRC robot on a field by itself, no human driving it, what will it do? Robots are still not capable of being athletes, the most sophisticated robots in the world are capable of playing games with varying degrees of success, FRC robots are not even capable of that. Without a human driver there were no robots in breakaway that could be considered athletes, they are really just machines. We are decades away from anything close to a machine that can reason and function well enough to force us to examine our definition of an athlete.

[Sconrad]

Originally Posted by JamesBrown

Put an FRC robot on a field by itself, no human driving it, what will it do? Robots are still not capable of being athletes, the most sophisticated robots in the world are capable of playing games with varying degrees of success, FRC robots are not even capable of that. Without a human driver there were no robots in breakaway that could be considered athletes, they are really just machines. We are decades away from anything close to a machine that can reason and function well enough to force us to examine our definition of an athlete.

Umm, that sounds an awful lot like autonomous...

Yes, I realize that a 15 second autonomous is far from complete artificial intelligence. That aside, I tend to agree with you that the robots are not athletes. Also, I'm not sure I see the point of arguing too much over whether or not FIRST is a sport, even on a financial level. I am a member of my school's marching band, and while we are not considered a sport, a lot of money goes into the program. It isn't close to the budget of the football team, but honestly, comparing a club's budget to a football team is never a good idea. If you compare the budget of a swimming team, which seems to fit all of the definitions of sports that have been posted so far, to a football team, the swimming team is going to come up way short almost without exception.

FIRST markets itself as a sport because many concepts often associated with sports, lots of extracurricular hours, exciting spectator events, and the development of talents within the athlete/student, to list a couple, are part of FIRST. Currently, most people categorize extracurricular activities as clubs or sports. To call FIRST a club does it a gross injustice, as the vast majority of clubs fail to provide the excitement and motivation that FIRST provides. While FIRST is not necessarily the epitome of a sport, sport is definitely a better classification of FIRST than club. In reality, FIRST falls into an interesting niche that cannot really be classified definitively as a sport or as a club. IMHO, this has a lot to do with the fact that FIRST seeks to emulate and expose students to the professional world, using the excitement of a sporting event as a cover for this purpose.

As a side note, I think you guys are focusing way too much on student drivers. The position of student driver is rarely held by anywhere close to the majority of students on the team. I don't think I saw any posts mentioning either the scouting or the spectator aspect. While these are not part of most dictionary definitions, they are a key part of the connotation of what is a sport.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents

[JamesCH95]

Originally Posted by Laaba 80

It is true that humans have no physical exertion during the game, but the robots are clearly physically exerting themselves. The robots are the athletes.

I think that people are exerting energy during a match. Pushing a joystick or a button requires a force applied over a distance (energy) and therefore the driver is physically exerting energy. It may not be much, but it is greater than zero.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by JamesCH95

I think that people are exerting energy during a match. Pushing a joystick or a button requires a force applied over a distance (energy) and therefore the driver is physically exerting energy. It may not be much, but it is greater than zero.

That defines any game as a sport. Is there no distinction? I thought sport was a subset of game.

[JamesCH95]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

That defines any game as a sport. Is there no distinction? I thought sport was a subset of game.

Hehe... you're right.

On the subject: a local high school awards varsity letters to the debate team. By their definition thinking and talking is a sport.

Where is the line drawn? Or is this is really a "I know it when I see it" definition?