Should WWE-style wrestling be considered a "sport"? (1 Viewer)

[Binary_Digit]

Irrespective of whether or not you find WWE-style wrestling entertaining, do you think it should be considered a "sport"? (For simplicity, I'm just calling it "wrestling" from here out)

The noun "sport" is defined as:

physical activity engaged in for pleasure (Merriam Webster)
an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature (dictionary.com)
an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or a team competes against another or others for entertainment (Oxford Dictionary (via Forbes because accountwall))

Many folks would call wrestling "fake" since there is no actual competition like in the Olympics, instead it's full of choreographed acting and the match winner is pre-determined before hand. But there seems to be disagreement among dictionaries about whether or not competition vs. others is a requirement to be a "sport." I guess there's no right or wrong answer yet, so what do you think?

(Side note on the "fake" thing: Wrestlers often do some amazing and incredibly athletic things, many of which can be extremely dangerous if not done with a high degree of technical precision. And the slaps and body slams are certainly not fake at all, so even though punches are pulled and most of their pain reactions are obvious over-acting and melodrama, they do endure a lot of incidental physical abuse that isn't the least bit fake. And, contrary to what it might seem, the match is not actually choreographed before hand. The wrestlers themselves ad-lib the whole thing, finding opportunities during the match to subtly communicate what the next couple of moves will be and then acting them out accordingly. I think that's impressive.)

 

[ecofarm]

Acrobatic theater with falling. I think that's why the performers are so big. It makes the falling more dramatic.

 

[Redress]

Irrespective of whether or not you find WWE-style wrestling entertaining, do you think it should be considered a "sport"? (For simplicity, I'm just calling it "wrestling" from here out)

The noun "sport" is defined as:

physical activity engaged in for pleasure (Merriam Webster)
an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature (dictionary.com)
an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or a team competes against another or others for entertainment (Oxford Dictionary (via Forbes because accountwall))

Many folks would call wrestling "fake" since there is no actual competition like in the Olympics, instead it's full of choreographed acting and the match winner is pre-determined before hand. But there seems to be disagreement among dictionaries about whether or not competition vs. others is a requirement to be a "sport." I guess there's no right or wrong answer yet, so what do you think?

(Side note on the "fake" thing: Wrestlers often do some amazing and incredibly athletic things, many of which can be extremely dangerous if not done with a high degree of technical precision. And the slaps and body slams are certainly not fake at all, so even though punches are pulled and most of their pain reactions are obvious over-acting and melodrama, they do endure a lot of incidental physical abuse that isn't the least bit fake. And, contrary to what it might seem, the match is not actually choreographed before hand. The wrestlers themselves ad-lib the whole thing, finding opportunities during the match to subtly communicate what the next couple of moves will be and then acting them out accordingly. I think that's impressive.)

WWE uses the phrase “sports entertainment”, which seems fitting.

 

[Nap]

Irrespective of whether or not you find WWE-style wrestling entertaining, do you think it should be considered a "sport"? (For simplicity, I'm just calling it "wrestling" from here out)

The noun "sport" is defined as:

physical activity engaged in for pleasure (Merriam Webster)
an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature (dictionary.com)
an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or a team competes against another or others for entertainment (Oxford Dictionary (via Forbes because accountwall))

Many folks would call wrestling "fake" since there is no actual competition like in the Olympics, instead it's full of choreographed acting and the match winner is pre-determined before hand. But there seems to be disagreement among dictionaries about whether or not competition vs. others is a requirement to be a "sport." I guess there's no right or wrong answer yet, so what do you think?

(Side note on the "fake" thing: Wrestlers often do some amazing and incredibly athletic things, many of which can be extremely dangerous if not done with a high degree of technical precision. And the slaps and body slams are certainly not fake at all, so even though punches are pulled and most of their pain reactions are obvious over-acting and melodrama, they do endure a lot of incidental physical abuse that isn't the least bit fake. And, contrary to what it might seem, the match is not actually choreographed before hand. The wrestlers themselves ad-lib the whole thing, finding opportunities during the match to subtly communicate what the next couple of moves will be and then acting them out accordingly. I think that's impressive.)

I wouldn't call it a sport as there is no competition. It is basically a soap opera for men.

 

[KevinKohler]

Irrespective of whether or not you find WWE-style wrestling entertaining, do you think it should be considered a "sport"? (For simplicity, I'm just calling it "wrestling" from here out)

The noun "sport" is defined as:

physical activity engaged in for pleasure (Merriam Webster)
an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature (dictionary.com)
an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or a team competes against another or others for entertainment (Oxford Dictionary (via Forbes because accountwall))

Many folks would call wrestling "fake" since there is no actual competition like in the Olympics, instead it's full of choreographed acting and the match winner is pre-determined before hand. But there seems to be disagreement among dictionaries about whether or not competition vs. others is a requirement to be a "sport." I guess there's no right or wrong answer yet, so what do you think?

(Side note on the "fake" thing: Wrestlers often do some amazing and incredibly athletic things, many of which can be extremely dangerous if not done with a high degree of technical precision. And the slaps and body slams are certainly not fake at all, so even though punches are pulled and most of their pain reactions are obvious over-acting and melodrama, they do endure a lot of incidental physical abuse that isn't the least bit fake. And, contrary to what it might seem, the match is not actually choreographed before hand. The wrestlers themselves ad-lib the whole thing, finding opportunities during the match to subtly communicate what the next couple of moves will be and then acting them out accordingly. I think that's impressive.)

No more than acting (and their stunt doubles) is a sport.

 

[dave8383]

 

[trouble13]

I would call the wrestlers atheletes

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Bucky]

All I can say is watching these wrestling matches in empty arenas makes zero sense. It looks completely fake and as a wrestling fan, I say that respectfully.

 

[Bucky]

No social distancing.

Gronk wins the 24/7 title.

WTF? Crazy.

 

[yankintx]

Irrespective of whether or not you find WWE-style wrestling entertaining, do you think it should be considered a "sport"? (For simplicity, I'm just calling it "wrestling" from here out)

The noun "sport" is defined as:

physical activity engaged in for pleasure (Merriam Webster)
an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature (dictionary.com)
an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or a team competes against another or others for entertainment (Oxford Dictionary (via Forbes because accountwall))

Many folks would call wrestling "fake" since there is no actual competition like in the Olympics, instead it's full of choreographed acting and the match winner is pre-determined before hand. But there seems to be disagreement among dictionaries about whether or not competition vs. others is a requirement to be a "sport." I guess there's no right or wrong answer yet, so what do you think?

(Side note on the "fake" thing: Wrestlers often do some amazing and incredibly athletic things, many of which can be extremely dangerous if not done with a high degree of technical precision. And the slaps and body slams are certainly not fake at all, so even though punches are pulled and most of their pain reactions are obvious over-acting and melodrama, they do endure a lot of incidental physical abuse that isn't the least bit fake. And, contrary to what it might seem, the match is not actually choreographed before hand. The wrestlers themselves ad-lib the whole thing, finding opportunities during the match to subtly communicate what the next couple of moves will be and then acting them out accordingly. I think that's impressive.)

Ah no, every move is rehearsed, the winner determined in advance. There is no competition.

It's entertainment for some, but to call it a sport, no.

And really, those trunks on fat over 40 men has no place on TV.

 

[Hari Seldon]

Irrespective of whether or not you find WWE-style wrestling entertaining, do you think it should be considered a "sport"? (For simplicity, I'm just calling it "wrestling" from here out)

The noun "sport" is defined as:

physical activity engaged in for pleasure (Merriam Webster)
an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature (dictionary.com)
an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or a team competes against another or others for entertainment (Oxford Dictionary (via Forbes because accountwall))

Many folks would call wrestling "fake" since there is no actual competition like in the Olympics, instead it's full of choreographed acting and the match winner is pre-determined before hand. But there seems to be disagreement among dictionaries about whether or not competition vs. others is a requirement to be a "sport." I guess there's no right or wrong answer yet, so what do you think?

(Side note on the "fake" thing: Wrestlers often do some amazing and incredibly athletic things, many of which can be extremely dangerous if not done with a high degree of technical precision. And the slaps and body slams are certainly not fake at all, so even though punches are pulled and most of their pain reactions are obvious over-acting and melodrama, they do endure a lot of incidental physical abuse that isn't the least bit fake. And, contrary to what it might seem, the match is not actually choreographed before hand. The wrestlers themselves ad-lib the whole thing, finding opportunities during the match to subtly communicate what the next couple of moves will be and then acting them out accordingly. I think that's impressive.)

Its entertainment but not a sport. I used to love watching with my Grandpa on Saturday nights.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Irrespective of whether or not you find WWE-style wrestling entertaining, do you think it should be considered a "sport"?

Should WWE-style wrestling be considered a "sport"?

Sure!! Just as we consider Trump a "president". :lamo

 

[Binary_Digit]

I wouldn't call it a sport as there is no competition. It is basically a soap opera for men.

Ah no, every move is rehearsed, the winner determined in advance. There is no competition.

It's entertainment for some, but to call it a sport, no.

And really, those trunks on fat over 40 men has no place on TV.

The definition of "sport" doesn't necessarily call for "competition" though. Do we call fishing a "sport" if we're not actively comparing our successes to someone else? What about canoeing and kayacking? Hiking and backpacking? There are plenty of activities that don't involve competition but are still considered sports. I think they're typically distinguished as "non-competitive", but still sports. Do you disagree?

 

[Nap]

The definition of "sport" doesn't necessarily call for "competition" though. Do we call fishing a "sport" if we're not actively comparing our successes to someone else? What about canoeing and kayacking? Hiking and backpacking? There are plenty of activities that don't involve competition but are still considered sports. I think they're typically distinguished as "non-competitive", but still sports. Do you disagree?

Outside of hiking and backpacking (does anyone consider those sports?) Pretty much everything you listed has competitions in that sport.

Wrestling is basically extreme acting where the actors are their own stunt doubles (99% of the time)

 

[WillyPete]

I'd say the main distinction is you can bet on a sport, because the outcome is unknown (or at least it's supposed to be.)

Whereas he outcome of a wrasslin' match is set in stone a week in advance, when they are story-boarding the event.

 

[yankintx]

The definition of "sport" doesn't necessarily call for "competition" though. Do we call fishing a "sport" if we're not actively comparing our successes to someone else? What about canoeing and kayacking? Hiking and backpacking? There are plenty of activities that don't involve competition but are still considered sports. I think they're typically distinguished as "non-competitive", but still sports. Do you disagree?

Not sure

I don't watch WWE. My father was into it. Myself I find it silly, but to each there own. Prefer track and field events.

 

[Peter King]

Irrespective of whether or not you find WWE-style wrestling entertaining, do you think it should be considered a "sport"? (For simplicity, I'm just calling it "wrestling" from here out)

The noun "sport" is defined as:

physical activity engaged in for pleasure (Merriam Webster)
an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature (dictionary.com)
an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or a team competes against another or others for entertainment (Oxford Dictionary (via Forbes because accountwall))

Many folks would call wrestling "fake" since there is no actual competition like in the Olympics, instead it's full of choreographed acting and the match winner is pre-determined before hand. But there seems to be disagreement among dictionaries about whether or not competition vs. others is a requirement to be a "sport." I guess there's no right or wrong answer yet, so what do you think?

(Side note on the "fake" thing: Wrestlers often do some amazing and incredibly athletic things, many of which can be extremely dangerous if not done with a high degree of technical precision. And the slaps and body slams are certainly not fake at all, so even though punches are pulled and most of their pain reactions are obvious over-acting and melodrama, they do endure a lot of incidental physical abuse that isn't the least bit fake. And, contrary to what it might seem, the match is not actually choreographed before hand. The wrestlers themselves ad-lib the whole thing, finding opportunities during the match to subtly communicate what the next couple of moves will be and then acting them out accordingly. I think that's impressive.)

I love WWE but it is not a sport, it is an athletic and specialized physical activity, but it does not have a competitive element because it is staged and fake to a large degree.

 

[Peter King]

I would call the wrestlers atheletes

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Yes, but it is not a sport.

 

[trouble13]

Re: Should WWE-style wrestling be considered a "sport"?

Yes, but it is not a sport.

It fits the definition of a sport

noun

1.

an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment.

Sport | Definition of Sport by Lexico



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Peter King]

Re: Should WWE-style wrestling be considered a "sport"?

It fits the definition of a sport

Sport | Definition of Sport by Lexico



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

To take my words from John Oliver:

Are they though? Are they really though?

Because if you compete against someone normally means participating in a contest, and WWE is not a contest as the moves are choreographed, agreed in advance and the winner is already decided before the match takes place, that is not a contest, that is more like a dance with a modicum degree of "looks like violence" thrown into the mix.

 

[dairyair]

Irrespective of whether or not you find WWE-style wrestling entertaining, do you think it should be considered a "sport"? (For simplicity, I'm just calling it "wrestling" from here out)

The noun "sport" is defined as:

physical activity engaged in for pleasure (Merriam Webster)
an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature (dictionary.com)
an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or a team competes against another or others for entertainment (Oxford Dictionary (via Forbes because accountwall))

Many folks would call wrestling "fake" since there is no actual competition like in the Olympics, instead it's full of choreographed acting and the match winner is pre-determined before hand. But there seems to be disagreement among dictionaries about whether or not competition vs. others is a requirement to be a "sport." I guess there's no right or wrong answer yet, so what do you think?

(Side note on the "fake" thing: Wrestlers often do some amazing and incredibly athletic things, many of which can be extremely dangerous if not done with a high degree of technical precision. And the slaps and body slams are certainly not fake at all, so even though punches are pulled and most of their pain reactions are obvious over-acting and melodrama, they do endure a lot of incidental physical abuse that isn't the least bit fake. And, contrary to what it might seem, the match is not actually choreographed before hand. The wrestlers themselves ad-lib the whole thing, finding opportunities during the match to subtly communicate what the next couple of moves will be and then acting them out accordingly. I think that's impressive.)

Nothing competitive about WWE. The outcomes are rigged.

Are they athletes, absolutely. But rigging an outcome isn't a sport. It's pure entertainment.

 

[trouble13]

Re: Should WWE-style wrestling be considered a "sport"?

To take my words from John Oliver:

Are they though? Are they really though?

Because if you compete against someone normally means participating in a contest, and WWE is not a contest as the moves are choreographed, agreed in advance and the winner is already decided before the match takes place, that is not a contest, that is more like a dance with a modicum degree of "looks like violence" thrown into the mix.

Is dance a sport?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Drawdown]

Irrespective of whether or not you find WWE-style wrestling entertaining, do you think it should be considered a "sport"? (For simplicity, I'm just calling it "wrestling" from here out)

The noun "sport" is defined as:

physical activity engaged in for pleasure (Merriam Webster)
an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature (dictionary.com)
an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or a team competes against another or others for entertainment (Oxford Dictionary (via Forbes because accountwall))

Many folks would call wrestling "fake" since there is no actual competition like in the Olympics, instead it's full of choreographed acting and the match winner is pre-determined before hand. But there seems to be disagreement among dictionaries about whether or not competition vs. others is a requirement to be a "sport." I guess there's no right or wrong answer yet, so what do you think?

(Side note on the "fake" thing: Wrestlers often do some amazing and incredibly athletic things, many of which can be extremely dangerous if not done with a high degree of technical precision. And the slaps and body slams are certainly not fake at all, so even though punches are pulled and most of their pain reactions are obvious over-acting and melodrama, they do endure a lot of incidental physical abuse that isn't the least bit fake. And, contrary to what it might seem, the match is not actually choreographed before hand. The wrestlers themselves ad-lib the whole thing, finding opportunities during the match to subtly communicate what the next couple of moves will be and then acting them out accordingly. I think that's impressive.)

I am fine with calling it a sport. It is comparable to pairs gymnastics in some sense I suppose.

 

[Peter King]

Re: Should WWE-style wrestling be considered a "sport"?

Is dance a sport?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Is it a contest where every competitor can win? If not, then it is not a sport.