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

Definition of Sports Indeed, the definition of sports is very important in this debate. Let me first establish what I would consider the definition for sport. "An activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment:" [1] Now we must realize that for an activity to be a sport, it must have skill, physical exertion, competition and it must entertain people. My opponent clearly knows that video games have no physical exertion whatsoever otherwise he probably would have said so. So we then must come to the obvious conclusion that either the definition has to change or video games are not a sport. Definitions To back up the definition of sport, I will give a version of the definition that my opponent obviously thinks sports should be. My opponents version of sports is, "An activity involving skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment:" If my opponent objects to this definition, please state so and give your own definition. Now I shall give the definition of a game. "A form of competitive activity or sport played according to rules." [2] The definition of a game as you can see is a lot like my opponents definition. In fact, my opponents definition of sport is practically the definition of game (excluding "sport"). Sports are under the definition of game, as well as video games, board games, etc. You can see that games span across a wide variety of activities. If we were to take out the physical exertion in the definition of sports, literally all games could become sports. Music could become a sport, typing could become a sport, your job could become a sport because it all would fit under the broadened definition. This is why physical exertion is needed in the definition of sport and in the activity for it to qualify as a sport. Think of it as a squares and rectangles analogy. A rectangle is a four sided polygon with four right angles and opposite sides are equal. Games represent the rectangle and sports are like the square. A square can be a rectangle, but a rectangle can never be a square. And the only thing that makes that so, is the fact that the definition says so. The definition for a square and a rectangle cannot change otherwise both shapes would become muddy and unable to define. A rectangle, by definition, cannot be a square. The same is with sports and games. Why else are video games called video games? Mind Sport My opponent brings up the topic of chess being a mind sport. Chess is recognized as a mind sport. A mind sport is, "a sport or game that relies on a participant's mental ability as opposed to their physical strengths." [3] Mind sport has its own definition apart from sports. If my opponent is implying that because chess is a mind sport, therefore video games are one too (therefore under the umbrella of the definition sport), the evidence for that is seriously lacking. Mind sports, as clearly shown, rely on a participant's mental abilities (ex. Strategy). And to have something become a mind sport, it has to obviously be of about the same caliber in strategy and mind abilities as chess. Chess only became a mind sport because of the amount of mental abilities and strategy it took to win, more so than any other game. A mind sport is not the same thing as a game of risk. So what makes video games of the same caliber to chess? Skills/Strategy To back up the fact that video games lack the mind abilities and strategy necessary to qualify as a mind sport, I shall point out what my opponent said. " Games can require large amounts of strategy and even certain skill sets, such as twitch reflexes and hand maneuverability..." That is just about it. There is no backing up of points aside from saying that video games have reflex skills and hand maneuverability. There is no example of strategy, nothing that suggests that video games have remotely any mental skills let alone ones that could even qualify to become a mind sport. Video games compared to musical instruments and actual sports have relatively little strategy and even less skill. Then my opponent goes on to say that video games should be a sport and proves that with the words, "why shouldn't they be?" As if that's a valid point, my opponent continues on to say that I should be the one to argue that video games aren't a sport. May I remind my opponent that video games currently are not a sport. May I also remind my opponent that he is arguing for video game to become a sport and therefore has to actually put forth facts to prove so. I am here to defend sports and stop my opponent from making video games a sport. The Burden of Proof is upon my opponents shoulders and so far has not shifted. You cannot argue that a rectangle should be recognized as a square with the words, "why shouldn't they be?" [1] https://en.oxforddictionaries.com... [2] https://en.oxforddictionaries.com... [3] http://www.mindsportsinternational.com...