Before we go any further with this thread, I'd like to point out that I have already looked up the dictionary definition of "sport" and I understand that, by the textbook definition, a sport is athletic in nature. But I'm really more referring to how YOU personally think about these sorts of things. As I mentioned in another thread, I've recently started playing chess again after several years away from the game. And last night I was watching a 60 Minutes piece on Magnus Carlsen, the current world champion. In it, Charlie Rose refers to chess as a sport and it made me think of the nature of sports and whether or not games like chess should be considered "sports." Really, chess could be substituted for anything that's not athletic, but that's fiercely competitive and that follows the same sort of trajectory of typical sports, such as hard training, and leagues and competitions. This would also include competitive Scrabble or Monopoly or spelling bees. Personally, I think of them as more sport than not. While I do understand it's not technically correct by the textbook definition, I think it makes more sense to expand that definition than to, presumably, have to create an entirely new general term to collectively refer to these sorts of activities. So do you look at non-athletic games as sports? If so, why? And if not, why not?