Screw it I'm doing this again. Just pick a topic related to games.

Definitions My opponent's definition as stated before is, "A sport is a game that requires skill, strength, strategy, or any balance of the three, which can be used to test those qualities and the ability to apply such qualities in the game. Further, it has to be widely known and understood, and, above all else, it must be considered a sport by the community" Let us break it down bit by bit considering that it is a very lengthy, broad definition. "A sport is a game..." We already know that sport falls under the umbrella definition of game. "... that requires skill, strength, strategy, or any balance of the three,..." My opponent has basically said that for a game to be a sport, it has to have skill, strategy or strength, varying in how much of each. Now we know that skill and strategy is something that is iffy about video games, but strength is a whole other matter. Now the definition for strength is, "The quality or state of being physically strong:" [1] Now we come back to the argument over physical exertion. If my opponent means 'balance of the three' meaning it could be just a balance of "skill and strategy" or "strength and skill", etc and not the third option (if the game didn't have strength for example), that is literally the definition of game and therefore makes my opponents definition invalid. If that isn't so, that means all three are a, "must have" for a game to be a sport. My opponent said golf and chess don't require physical exertion. May I remind my opponent that chess is a mind sport and therefore is apart from the definition of sport. May I also remind my opponent that golf is physically exerting. Just in the same sense that my opponent thinks that LoL has strategy, golf requires strength. If it did not require you to be physically strong, how come men's swings are more powerful than others? Wouldn't they all be the same if golf wasn't physically exerting? So we actually haven't taken out physical exertion as a prerequisite. Therefore, this has made your definition unhelpful to your cause. May I also point out the fact that my opponent used the words, "or any balance of the three..." This is extremely vague and is practically still the exact same as the definition for game. Like I said before, if you took out the 'physical exertion' in the definition for sport, you'd end up with the definition for game. May I remind my opponent of the analogy of the square and rectangle. A square can be a rectangle but a rectangle cannot be a square. The definitions for sport and game may be similar, but they're not. Do not get them mixed up when trying to create a new definition. Otherwise the definition, like my opponents one, is wrong in this context. "...which can be used to test those qualities and the ability to apply such qualities in the game..." That's exactly what sports do. "... Further, it has to be widely known and understood, and, above all else, it must be considered a sport by the community." And then my opponent clarifies this by saying, technically if the fans who care about the game want the game to be a sport, therefore it is a sport. Firstly, this has absolutely no logic to it whatsoever. Just because I want tic-tac-toe to become a sport does not mean that it makes it a sport just because I want it to be one. Tic-Tac-Toe does not qualify to be a sport and my 'willing' it to be one, won't make it a sport. Therefore, it makes this last bit of my opponents definition invalid. Just because video gamers want to tell people they play a sport when they actually don't, does not mean that their 'wanting' has any bearing on whether video games become a sport or not. Look at it this way, if my opponents definition were true, a sport could be a game of monopoly. If the monopoly players truly believed their game was a sport, then it would be one because my opponents definition is incredibly vague. A game of tic-tac-toe could be a sport under my opponents very broad definition. Then my opponent tells me not to look too closely to his definition because in his words, "... those circle around specifics, or otherwise loopholes and misconceptions that don't need to be brought up." This is incredibly ridiculous. A definition is the exact meaning of a word. There shouldn't be any loop holes in a definition, which is what makes my opponents definition even more invalid. Therefore by giving this definition, (which is essentially the definition for game), my opponent has gained absolutely nothing and video games still do not deserve/qualify to be a sport. Strategy Strategy is used in sports and mind sports. Since we already know that video games still do not qualify/deserve to be a sport, it therefore doesn't matter whether my opponent proves that gaming takes strategy. Nevertheless, I will continue. My opponents next points are basically, LoL has strategy, to prove that, here are a ton of links. Or you can just not check my links and accept that LoL has strategy. So, I did not take my opponents word for it. I checked all the links and actually, they're not 'strategy guides'. They are basic to intermediate manuals on how to play LoL, which actually don't really elaborate too much on how LoL has strategy. May I point out the fact that my opponent vaguely says LoL has strategy. May I also point out the fact that my opponent just posted a bunch of links without actually elaborating on what the links say. If debates were like that, why would anybody bother trying to write out everything? Why not just post a bunch of links? My opponent even admits that he himself only briefly glanced at these links before posting them. These links are barely adequate to prove that LoL has strategy that is even complex. May I also state that LoL is one game out of many video games. So tell me, how does a FPS game like Battlefront have strategy? How about other genres of video games? Do they have strategy too? As a side note, it really doesn't matter that LoL has lots of terms and details. So does D&D. Does that make D&D a sport? Science has lots of terms, more so than LoL. Does that make science a sport? Then my opponent says that the guides are surface level compared to the strategy in ESports. This is again, an empty statement like many of my other opponents statements. So basically my opponent has provided empty statements with links to manual guides to back up his statement that LoL has strategy. To back up the fact that video games do not contain much strategy let alone enough to qualify as a mind sport, I shall state that LoL is just one game out of many games. And obviously my opponent chose LoL to represent that video games have strategy because it's probably the most strategic video game out there. So that means that LoL is the pinnacle game for strategy. All other games are below it in that category. LoL may have strategy, but the majority of other video games do not have as much strategy as LoL (the strategy in LoL is even doubtful). When the majority of video games do not have strategy, or a bare minimum of it, how could my opponents definition let alone mind sports definition aide my opponents cause? For someone who is supposedly an "insider" in LoL, feel free to explain your strategy. Try not to lie though, I've had many an opponents who's lied to put forth an argument. As for "should video gaming be a sport?" Let me use a comparison. Should I eat this apple? The use of the word "should" means that I haven't eaten the apple yet and am pondering whether I should. This is the same for should video games be a sport? They are currently not a sport and we are pondering whether it should be one. I do not have to do anything because video games are currently not a sport. You are the one who has to come up with a point that could actually shift the BOP off your shoulders. Right now, all you have been doing is trying to refute my points. You have one last round to come forth with a point. As for disqualifications/qualifications. You said it yourself that we need to prove that either video games qualify or don't qualify to be a sport. To qualify for something, generally the thing that's qualifying has to meet all the prerequisites. Since video gaming has not met the prerequisite for sports (physical exertion), it therefore still isn't a sport. [1] https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...