Should computer gaming be an olympic sport?

I've been an archery athlete! It's not all that taxing but you do need arm strength, endurance a reasonable core and solid balance to be elite. You need none of these physical attributes to be good at computer gaming. It's all mental whereas archery is only mostly mental. This is why I'd say no.

Starcraft 2 is huge at the moment.

I've been an archery athlete! It's not all that taxing but you do need arm strength, endurance a reasonable core and solid balance to be elite. You need none of these physical attributes to be good at computer gaming. It's all mental whereas archery is only mostly mental. This is why I'd say no.

Ok, so can you explain how playing this game is equivalent to training for an Olympic sport? Maybe compare it to something like the pentathlon or cycling in the velodrome?

I'm sorry, maybe I'm not educated enough in the training processes of those sports to understand how they are fundamentally different?

Are you saying that the practice would be monotonous, doing the same thing over and over, yet for olympic sports this is not the case or what are you saying?

I'm saying that training for an Olympic sport would be much more difficult than training to play a computer game well. To be good enough for Olympics, you need to be absolute top of the tree in a multitude of skills related to your sport. It's not just the training itself, it's the determination to succeed and be the best, beating all others in local/national competitions. It's about teamwork, coaching, support, not to mention financial support. Remember the Olympics is about entertainment and corporate sponsorship. Would people pay to watch people sitting and playing a game? Regardless of how much 'training' the players have done for it, most of the audience wouldn't see it as a high level thing, they'd be thinking 'I could do that too'. Whereas as proper Olympic sport is exciting and jaw dropping achievement that pushes to the limit what mankind is capable of.

I literally posted you a video link of a 40,000 seater stadium absolutely packed full. World gaming championships are televised; the commercial pull is massive. And it's just as hard to be 'world class' as it is with any sport. People get paid for coaching it etc too.

Unsuitable for olympics obviously, but just as hard and probably more popular.

I'm saying that training for an Olympic sport would be much more difficult than training to play a computer game well. To be good enough for Olympics, you need to be absolute top of the tree in a multitude of skills related to your sport. It's not just the training itself, it's the determination to succeed and be the best, beating all others in local/national competitions. It's about teamwork, coaching, support, not to mention financial support. Remember the Olympics is partly about entertainment and corporate sponsorship. Would people pay to watch people sitting and playing a computer game? Regardless of how much 'training' the players have done for it, most of the audience wouldn't see it as a high level thing, they'd be thinking 'I could do that too'. Whereas as proper Olympic sport is exciting and jaw dropping achievement that pushes to the limit what mankind is capable of.

Monopoly should be an Olympic sport because it needs a lot of concentration and skill to throw the numbers you want on the dice.

This is what this entire thread is about. From what you're saying, computer gaming is probably more popular than I'm aware of, but do countries compete to host it every 4 years? Do loads of ordinary people madly rush to get tickets? Competitive computer gaming might grow in popularity over the years but it is still a niche and not mainstream like the Olympics. We can argue about what's more skilful until the cows come home (you'll never convince me) but unless they are a gamer and into competitive gaming themselves, I can't imagine the average person in the street would believe it should be included in the Olympics. You just admitted it yourself and that was entirely my point all along.

Yea they do, but the demographic for those wanting to spend time/money on computer game spectating is vastly different from those wanting to spend time/money on olympics.

That said, the demographic is bigger than for most Olympic sports. Like football, they'd just not take the Olympics seriously if they had to field teams.

It would be more realistic having fapping in there.

Absolutely ridiculous comparison. That's like poker.

1) No dexterity is involved with it.

2) There is far too large an amount of luck involved with such "games" which is why they are not sports - competitive video games are so well balanced that you can study them like a sport and deduce the optimal actions in every single scenario based on each of the choices you predict your foe to make.

This is what this entire thread is about. From what you're saying, computer gaming is probably more popular than I'm aware of, but do countries compete to host it every 4 years? Do loads of ordinary people madly rush to get tickets? Competitive computer gaming might grow in popularity over the years but it is still a niche and not mainstream like the Olympics. We can argue about what's more skilful until the cows come home (you'll never convince me) but unless they are a gamer and into competitive gaming themselves, I can't imagine the average person in the street would believe it should be included in the Olympics. You just admitted it yourself and that was entirely my point all along.