I'd consider it more of a sport than poker. At least in darts you can actually have a crowd cheer for a great play and actually see what is going on without watching it on tv. As long people enjoy watching darts, i think it is mostly a sport. I don't think it will catch on here in America though as far as a spectator sport goes.
Sport, hobby, recreation...WHATEVER!!! As is always the case, someone has to step up and declare HIS "love" is the only real thing, and everybody else's ain't squat. I've played baseball, football, basketball, soccer, been hunting, thrown darts, been to NASCAR and played poker. Enjoyed it ALL! Get over this macho crap and let people just enjoy themselves, WHATEVER their "game"! JESUS!
13 years as the best in the world at anything is impressive.
BY ALL THE CRITERIA THAT HAS BEEN LISTED...SEX IS A SPORT TOO! A sport the United States would kick ass in if it were an Olympic sport! Make it a team event, like rowing! Two athletes in a bed and the team captain sitting on the headboard chanting.."
STROKE....STROKE...STROKE". GOLD MEDAL TO THE UNITED STATES!
ROFL, CD, ROFL! Where do I sign up to do the judging?
I don't know. Smart money would be on the Swedes and the Thais, methinks.
Would Viagra and Cialis be considered "illegal enhancing drugs" in this case. "AND THE GOLD MEDAL GOES TO PETER NORTH!"
... and it also meets HATER's criteria
In the Guardian today, a "debate" between Phil Taylor and Tom McNab (former driector of coaching for British Athletics) about whether or not darts should be in the 2012 games. As amateur has already pointed out (and McNab reinforces), darts won't be in the London games regardless of what anyone thinks as to whether it should be or not. That aid, it's interesting to read the two opinions. Taylor's is verging on illiterate begging, while McNab's is just completely inaccurate in places and makes up a new word ('Olympism' anyone?). One thing I will say against the latter's final argument ("There is a minimum level of physical activity which is required and that means darts cannot be considered.") is that although there is clearly very little physical activity involved, surely there is more than there is in prone rifle shooting. At least the darts players have the decency to stand up while they're playing their sport.
Ricardo...You Da Man! Thats funny!
And prone rifle shooting can go too. Why is it the oddball sports (at least mostly) are the big olympic draws...Who watches bobsled or luge or figure skating when it isn't wrapped in olympic rings?
Yes JJ, he keeps coming back to that point -- and although I agree that a minimum level of physical exertion is required, it is hard to argue that darts requires less than some of the current 'sports.'
Ricardo, why should the size of the audience be used as a measuring stick of a sport's worth?
That is a little backwards...I think a sport, or activity, has its' worth determined by the audience it attracts. I just think the Olympics would attract a much huger audience if more high profile sports were included.
After all, an enormous audience was exactly what Baron de Coubertin was after. Don't forget the Olympic ideals - faster (news coverage), stronger (advertising), higher (ratings).
Well Ricardo, you're right about the second part. I'm sure that the Olympics would attract a "much huger" audience if they included a Formula 1 grand prix, world cup calibre men's football, professional golf, and world cup calibre cricket. In my mind, though, that isn't really the point, and you're the one that's got it backwards.
