Is Chess a Sport¿

[Stapel]

Originally posted by Håkon


Didn't know that was part of your New Year's tradition as well, I just assumed that because you had no good athletes you didn't watch it. There were even some Austrian guy who jumped for Netherlands a couple of years ago - think his mum was Dutch or something.

Anyway, to your point, the V-jumps weren't as stylish (according to the judges - I think they're much nicer), but the jumpers used them because they got more points for length. The jury eventually realised that it was just as nice, and gave them points for it.

And besides, in ski jumping you still have to wait for the lengths to be measured - in fact, often that is what takes the longest time these days, not setting marks from the judges.

If a guy gets a really good jump, far down the hill, but fails to land properly and waves his arms a lot, he shouldn't get as many points as a guy who has perfectly straight arms, does a great landing etc. IMO. But I have a feeling I won't convince you...

The jury element I dislike is not completely black&white. Any sport has rules and a referee or jury to judge players or situations. Point is: As long as these rules can be used in a clear and objective way, there is no problem.

If it were up to me, football assistant referees will take place behind a set of monitors starting tomorrow!

To use the ski-jump example: It is quite easy to determine if someone did a good landing or not. So I can accept that. But the V jump... That is a matter of taste 100%.

And if I develop a very special way of waving my arms during the jump, which increases the jump with 10 metres? what am I doing then? Streching the boundaries and limits? Or raping the style rules?

I understand the rule is there to prevent lucky louzy jumpers to win by a once in a lifetime superjump.

And Haakon,

Since you must know! Can you reveil the secrets of scoring points?

5 jury members that give 0-20 points. Only 3 count, so usually a result around 45 or so for the top jumpers.
Say the jump is 100 metres, what is the final score then? All I know it is not 145.......

 

[Håkon]

Originally posted by Stapel


The jury element I dislike is not completely black&white. Any sport has rules and a referee or jury to judge players or situations. Point is: As long as these rules can be used in a clear and objective way, there is no problem.

If it were up to me, football assistant referees will take place behind a set of monitors starting tomorrow!

To use the ski-jump example: It is quite easy to determine if someone did a good landing or not. So I can accept that. But the V jump... That is a matter of taste 100%.

And if I develop a very special way of waving my arms during the jump, which increases the jump with 10 metres? what am I doing then? Streching the boundaries and limits? Or raping the style rules?

I understand the rule is there to prevent lucky louzy jumpers to win by a once in a lifetime superjump.

And Haakon,

Since you must know! Can you reveil the secrets of scoring points?

5 jury members that give 0-20 points. Only 3 count, so usually a result around 45 or so for the top jumpers.
Say the jump is 100 metres, what is the final score then? All I know it is not 145.......

Well, I see your point. I'd say that you are revolutionising the sport, which has happened a lot of times - at the start, everybody is against it, then they change the rules and then it's OK again. There is a set of official rules, and the jumpers should be able to know them. What I dislike personally is the way judges automatically give poor marks to jumpers who start early - there is a Czech guy who is really stylish in air, never moves a muscle on the way down, always has perfect landings...yet he only gets 18.5 out of 20 because he starts early on. The best guys, like Malysz, Hannawald and Ljoekelsoey, get better marks cos they jump later. That bugs me, and I agree that that's unfair.

As for the points system (this is taught to every Norwegian at age 3 ):

There is a critical point set for each hill (Garmisch is 115m, I think most other hills are 120 apart from the ski flying ones). This critical points gives 60 length points. For each additional meter in the 115/120m hills, you score an extra 1.8 points, but if you jump shorter than 120m, you are deducted 1.8 points for each meter. Then the judges' marks are added - the highest and lowest are discarded, and the three others are added up.

Example: Roar Ljoekelsoey jumps 123.5m in Garmisch and gets 19.5, 19, 19, 19, 18.5 (I wish). 123.5m - 115m = 8.5 m * 1.8 p/m + 60 p = 75.3 p for length. Then add 19 + 19 + 19 = 57 p. 75.3 p + 57 p = 132.3 p.

And the top jumpers usually get more like 55 for style - 18.5 and 19 is normal marks for the best. 45 is for very poor jumpers, who doesn't land properly, move his muscles a lot, looks uncertain in the air and stuff (3 x 15)

Funny, the Norwegian commentators explain this almost before every competition...guess the Dutch ones don't know the system either

 

[Stapel]

Originally posted by Håkon


Well, I see your point. I'd say that you are revolutionising the sport, which has happened a lot of times - at the start, everybody is against it, then they change the rules and then it's OK again. There is a set of official rules, and the jumpers should be able to know them. What I dislike personally is the way judges automatically give poor marks to jumpers who start early - there is a Czech guy who is really stylish in air, never moves a muscle on the way down, always has perfect landings...yet he only gets 18.5 out of 20 because he starts early on. The best guys, like Malysz, Hannawald and Ljoekelsoey, get better marks cos they jump later. That bugs me, and I agree that that's unfair.

As for the points system (this is taught to every Norwegian at age 3 ):

There is a critical point set for each hill (Garmisch is 115m, I think most other hills are 120 apart from the ski flying ones). This critical points gives 60 length points. For each additional meter in the 115/120m hills, you score an extra 1.8 points, but if you jump shorter than 120m, you are deducted 1.8 points for each meter. Then the judges' marks are added - the highest and lowest are discarded, and the three others are added up.

Example: Roar Ljoekelsoey jumps 123.5m in Garmisch and gets 19.5, 19, 19, 19, 18.5 (I wish). 123.5m - 115m = 8.5 m * 1.8 p/m + 60 p = 75.3 p for length. Then add 19 + 19 + 19 = 57 p. 75.3 p + 57 p = 132.3 p.

And the top jumpers usually get more like 55 for style - 18.5 and 19 is normal marks for the best. 45 is for very poor jumpers, who doesn't land properly, move his muscles a lot, looks uncertain in the air and stuff (3 x 15)

Funny, the Norwegian commentators explain this almost before every competition...guess the Dutch ones don't know the system either

A mystery reveiled!

BTW: I meant 55... just a poor way of using math.....

The Dutch commentators use phrases like 'critical point' and 'great style no muscle vibrations visible' in a way like they know all about it. Also the 3 out of 5 jury rule is mentioned a lot. The 60 length points might have been mentioned once or twice, but the 1.8 factor is new to me!

Another thing: Norwegians learn to ski-jump, before they learn to walk, don't they?

Great threadjack !

 

[col]

Originally posted by Stapel
Great threadjack !

If it wasnt such an interesting discussion I'd :rocket2:

 

[Håkon]

Originally posted by Stapel


A mystery reveiled!

BTW: I meant 55... just a poor way of using math.....

The Dutch commentators use phrases like 'critical point' and 'great style no muscle vibrations visible' in a way like they know all about it. Also the 3 out of 5 jury rule is mentioned a lot. The 60 length points might have been mentioned once or twice, but the 1.8 factor is new to me!

Another thing: Norwegians learn to ski-jump, before they learn to walk, don't they?

Great threadjack !

Yep, fantastic threadjack, even col agrees - from chess to ski jumping

Norwegians learn to ski almost at the time they learn to walk, but they don´t usually send three-year-olds down ski-jumps (well, only very small jumps)

The 1.8 point factor actually changes for the type of hill - a small hill (K90) has 2 points for each meter, and ski flying (K185 - like Planica in Slovenia, Kulm in Austria, Oberstdorf in Germany) has only 1.2 points for each meter.

Now you´re equipped to watch Eurosport every weekend if you want to

 

[Brewster]

Great threadjack. I've watched ski jumping on and off since the time of canadian jumperHorst Bulau (sp?). My favorite jumper had to be Eddie the Eagle in the '88 winter olympics in Calgary. What a display of grit and determination.

OT: Chess is a board game, not a sport.

 

[IglooDame]

I'm in agreement with whoever said physical skill is required for a sport. IMHO, chess is not a sport.

 

[luke ka boom]

hell no. you have to be able to brake a sweat in physical activity. for example:
Basketball
Baseball
Football
Hockey
Soccer
Rugby

You have to work out to train for a sport. Lift weights, sit-ups,push-ups,crunchs.
you don't work out for chess or any other board or video game.

 

[IglooDame]

Originally posted by luke ka boom
hell no. you have to be able to brake a sweat in physical activity. for example:
Basketball
Baseball
Football
Hockey
Soccer
Rugby

You have to work out to train for a sport. Lift weights, sit-ups,push-ups,crunchs.
you don't work out for chess or any other board or video game.

So... Golf? Bowling? Archery? No sweating in any of them, unless it's pretty warm out.

 

[polymath]

No, chess is definitely not a sport...a sport must involve some form of physical exertion...chess can be played remotely by a computer, or just by saying a move, or by correspondence (letters).

An activity like darts, or archery, means the player must bend the bow and take aim, or throw his dart. Chess can be played merely by saying something or writing something.

This means chess is definitely not a sport.

 

[OneFastWarrior]

Chess is a game, with only the excercise of the mind involved. To truly be a sport, one must have to have some sort of physical movement to cause one to perspire and muscles to scream and hurt.

IMHO.

 

[Alone]

Definetly not a sport!

I voted in this thread long time ago.

 

[col]

The thread that refuses to die.

Ok - I'm gonna put it quietly to sleep now.

Feel free to open another thread on skijumping