Email this story Print this story Archives

Sports television ... or some reasonable facsimilie

By Sam Brown
Friday, August 29, 2003 6:22 PM PDT

I've been watching ESPN lately and, while I know that fact probably shocks many of you, some of the programming I've seen moves me to add another log to the "is-it-sport-or-is-it competition" fire.

Raise your hands, sports fans, if you have watched any of the World Series of Poker telecasts ... I have to admit, I have watched more than one round of competition.

I don't know poker very well, but it's very interesting stuff, I really think. And certainly competitive, too. Poker integrates a lot of skill, gamesmanship and good old-fashioned luck - all key elements of captivating sport. Lots of money changes hands, and the thing takes place in Vegas, which is everyone's top sporting city. (Wink, wink)

And I never believed you could do play-by-play for a card game.

But while I have the utmost respect for those who ply this trade, can card playing really be classified as a sport? Just because somebody slaps the name "World Series" on something doesn't make it a sport, does it? I, for my part, think not. At least not in the traditional sense.

Many people might agree with me, too. Sport is the thrill of a 12th-round knockout, a two-minute drill, a last-second buzzer beater, a ninth-inning home run - these are the elements of what Americans traditionally define sports.

Sports and athletes traditionally go hand in hand. Athletes are physical specimens (except in the case of many professional golfers, but that is a discussion for another time) who hone their bodies into lean, mean competing machines.

Does this describe the average poker player? Have you seen these guys? For some of these guys, the only green field of competition they've seen in years is the felt of the card table.

Traditionally, poker is as much a sport as chess is.

That having been said, you'll notice I've been saying "traditionally" a lot. Strangely enough, not everyone agrees with my thoughts.

To wit, as I was researching this column, I was drawn to the dictionary, which I thought would prove my point incontrovertably. Instead, Webster decided to play my devil's advocate.

Sport is defined as both "a physical activity engaged in for pleasure" and "a source of diversion."

The former definition supports my contention; the latter, however, definitely allows for a more liberal interpretation.

Apparently the International Olympic Committee sees things in a more liberal light. No, poker is not an Olympic sport, but chess is, or at least could be. At the 2000 Sydney Games, chess was a trial sport, which is the first step to inclusion as a medal competition.

Has not the Olympic Games been the paramount example of international sport? If chess makes the grade as a sport according to the IOC, can poker be far behind? And why stop there - gin rummy, cribbage, Go Fish!, jacks and hopscotch ... you get the idea.

I guess by the dictionary definition, poker is a sport and therefore qualifies for broadcast on ESPN. But I hope the powers that be understand the floodgates they are opening here.

Pretty soon, the Super Bowl of Little League Chess will make the cut at ESPN, as will the Tiddlywink Finals and, of course, the Checkers Cup.

And you know, we'll probably watch those, too.

By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by our comment policy.

**Your Member ID and password will be required to log in. Your comments will appear under your user name.