> There is no inherent need of competition for every sport in my opinion I disagree. Competition is a defining property of ‘sport’. What’s wrong with calling

> There is no inherent need of competition for every sport in my opinion I disagree. Competition is a defining property of ‘sport’. What’s wrong with calling figure skating an art form? Nobody calls ballet or violin playing sports [1], but there are “prices, juries, etc” for them. I would split various activities in a group where objective measurements are more or less possible (they never fully are) and one where they aren’t. The first would consist of: - games, where your opponent has significant influence on your behavior or performance (basketball, judo, billiards, etc). Basically, if you can play defensively, it’s a game. - sports, where they don’t (archery, skiing, all forms of athletics; I would include the jumping events, even though your opponent’s performance may significantly affect your strategy. Etc.) The second would be ‘arts’. [1] if you look at the modern Olympics, painting and other art forms were events at some time, but that, but even then, did people call those sports?