IMO it has to be physically active with a competitive element. How physically active is obviously open to interpretation and personal opinion.
What about motor sports? Fitness isn't really necessary, apart from not being a big fat **** who can't fit in a car.
I wouldn't say any of them are sports personally. Just personal interpretation of the sport and it's a bit of a grey area.
In the main for me, a sport is whatever game gets a result by something quantifiable, like faster, higher, score more. Judged "sports" like ice skating, surfing etc don,t cut it with me.
Yeah, I suppose. That's something I've never been remotely interested in though, it seems to be about who has the fastest car in F1, don't necessarily need to be the best driver.
I don't think you need to be 'very fit' to drive any vehicle. They are required to maintain an aerobic fitness level so they don't pack silly amounts of weight on. Of course, anything over say 11 stone and you'd run the risk of losing your job as a driver in F1 and being replaced by somebody lighter. The words 'very fit' to me mean something completely different.
I'm not a big fan of F1 anymore, the WRC drivers are much better in terms of driving skill in my opinion, Robert Kubica springs to mind.
Personally I agree. But Chess, pool, snooker darts and motorsport all contradict my personal views and are classed as sports by governing bodies, that's the logic I used to say they probably are sports.
I believe so mate, they often get on the back of a horse 4/5 times in one afternoon and race. That's the equivalent of porking some bird at full speed from behind 4/5 times in one nightshift. **** that.
