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

Definition of SportsOn the subject of the definition you asserted for me, I don't quite believe that definition covers the term "sports", at least not fully. Before I tell you my definition, I would like to restate the topic and make one clarification."Should video gaming be a sport?"The use of the word "should" implies that it does not matter whether or not gaming is already a sport, but whether or not they deserve to be sports. In stating my definition, I will have to make it clear that, currently, video games aren't sports and perhaps, no matter how much they deserve it, may never be sports. My definition is as follows:"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"I understand that this may cause some issues, so allow me to clarify:when I say, "by the community", I mean those who deem it relevant; understand the topic (at least enough to make a decision); and identify as viewers, participators, or otherwise people who experience sports in some other fashion. And, to clarify my clarification, when I say "Identify as", I mean that it is up to the person to decide whether or not they are "players" (or "fans", or whatever makes sense) of the sport; If I watched one Nuggets game, that does not make me a fan of basketball.Furthermore, I know that there is room for misconceptions or loopholes in my definition, but those circle around specifics, or otherwise loopholes and misconceptions that don't need to be brought up.Also, a quick sidenote: golf and chess don't directly require physical exertion. So we have already taken out physical exertion as a prerequisite.Mental Sports and Skill/Strategy Both of my opponent's arguments from here on out base themselves on video games requiring no strategy. As I mentioned before, this was really a topic I didn't want my opponent to bring up. Perhaps I was unprepared for this, but I don't know how to explain games and their strategy to a person who has either never played video games or does not play games related to strategy. I can only assume that one of those two topics applies to you, otherwise you would not be talking about them here with me.So allow me to either enlighten you or fail at doing so.First of all, games are a diverse medium. In order to say that games in general do not have strategy, you must claim that games do not have the potential to have strategy, a claim that doesn't make sense, or claim that games that have strategy are few and far between, and therefore the games played on high level Esports streaming are unlikely to have any strategy.Assuming you are an outsider to gaming (which may be putting you into a box a little, but I don't really know what to assume) the latter claim may seem to hold water, so I understand that this argument not a surefire way to take your claim down.So, allow me to show you some of the aforementioned strategy:There is a game called League of Legends, or LoL. In this game, each of the playable characters has a different skill set, different special attacks (called abilities), different stats, etc. The goal of the game is to destroy the enemy side's "Nexus", which is guarded by the enemy team, a few turrets, and a lot of minions. Simple enough, right? Now that you have the background, allow me to show you some of the strategy in the gamehttp://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com...http://leaguecraft.com...-->skip the first two parts, they don't deal with strategy.http://www.mobafire.com...--->Most of this is just definitions and important terms. I would recommend the "choosing items" and lower for actual strategy, but the vast number of terms and details do prove my point about strategy. Handled that just fine? Here's something just a bit more complex.http://leaguecraft.com...;http://leaguecraft.com...https://www.scan.co.uk... And, if you're doing this at Esports levels, it just gets harder. Way harder. This is essentially surface level stuff in comparison.OR, if reading these guides is too much, which it may be (they are very long, and I only skimmed them myself), you could just trust me and everyone else who has had firsthand experience with these types of games before, and believe me when I say they require strategy. I swear it on my honor, these things require strategy in order to work. If you were to play me in LoL, I would demolish you.Also, it should go without saying, there are more strategy based games then just LoL, many of which require as much strategy. I didn't list them here because if I did, I would be posting links to strategy guides all day.And yes, I stand by what I said about twitch reflexes and finger speed. It sounds stupid, but play a game that requires twitch reflexes or anything like that (such as an FPS), and note the differences between how well you would play and how well professionals would play (there is footage out there on youtube, I guerrantee).The Burden of ProofI stand by what I said earlier. If games do not contradict the characteristics of sports, then they have the potential to be sports. Therefore, in order to argue that games should not be sports, you must find these contradictions and reveal them; I don't have to prove them to be capable of being considered sports because being capable of being sports is simply not contradicting with what could make it a sport.To paraphrase, if we were to find nothing that disqualifies it from being a sport, then it is a sport. Therefore, the only thing I can do, as well as the only thing I should have to do, is shoot down the arguments you make, which are the aforementioned disqualifications.You could argue that if nothing qualifies it as a sport, it is not a sport, which would be my argument flipped on its head. However, some of these qualifications are implied (if you ask me, strategy should be; you can't just assume that video games are incapable of strategy), so it is much simpler for you to explain why these qualifications don't count than it is to go over every given. With all of that said, what we are doing right now can be viewed as either discussing qualifications, disqualifications, or the lack thereof on either of those two terms. It doesn't matter how we phrase this from here on out, we are currently arguing over these topics, which is something we can both agree on.