«
»

I’m Not Seeing Tyson-Holyfield III

Wednesday, December 10th, 2003

chessboxing06.jpg

I give you Chess Boxing. My new favorite sport.

Hat tip: Gene Healy.

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

This entry was posted on Wednesday, December 10th, 2003 at 7:27 pm by Radley Balko and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

9 Responses to “I’m Not Seeing Tyson-Holyfield III”

  1. #1 |  Joe Sims |  December 10th, 2003 at 10:54 pm

    We need more sports that require two wholly disparate activities to occur. Biathlon was a good start with the skiing and shooting, and now chess boxing takes that one step further… Perhaps one day, we will have a sport where you jump rope for 45 minutes, then paint a portrait of your favorite member of the 1969 NY Mets.

    Besides, ESPN2 needs something to show at 2am…

  2. #2 |  fangsign |  December 11th, 2003 at 9:08 am

    It’s bad enough ESPN shows poker. It would be even worse if they started showing this crap.

  3. #3 |  Luca Brasi |  December 11th, 2003 at 10:32 am

    The World Series of Poker is a really good show.

  4. #4 |  Joe Sims |  December 11th, 2003 at 10:39 am

    Every time I see World Series of Poker, I am reminded of (IMO) Flounder’s best line in Animal House:

    Flounder: [standing at a table where several people are involved in a game of poker] “Are you guys playing cards?”

    I dunno, for some reason, the way he said it and the blank stares he got in response always cracked me up…

  5. #5 |  fangsign |  December 11th, 2003 at 11:05 am

    Poker is a game of chance. You either get good hands or you don’t. That’s why it’s called gambling.

    And it’s not a sport. If poker is a sport than so is old ladies sitting at slot machines, blowing their precious social security checks and smoking 7 packs an hour. I doubt ESPN is going to pitch that as a show.

    At least chess has skill involved. In that respect, it has more of a place on ESPN than poker does.

  6. #6 |  Micha Ghertner |  December 11th, 2003 at 11:15 am

    Luck may play a part in poker, but so does skill. If you watch these poker tournaments from year to year, you begin to notice that the same small group of players make it to the finals time after time. More so than most sporting events, I would wager.

    And if they can show the national spelling bee tournament on ESPN, they can certainly show poker.

  7. #7 |  Stormy Dragon |  December 11th, 2003 at 5:13 pm

    A particular hand of poker may be a game of chance, but the more hands you play, the more it becomes a game of skill.

    Over the course of many hands, a group of players will all experience roughly the same mix of outcomes. So many pairs, so many three of a kind, etc.

    Skillful players will be able to recognize which hands advantage them and which don’t, thus betting higher on good hands and thus winning more than they lose. Unskillful players will failt to recognize this and lose more than they win.

    However, even the poker is a game of skill, it is _not_ a sport, since it’s not a game of _physical_ skill.

  8. #8 |  Joe Sims |  December 11th, 2003 at 6:00 pm

    Maybe if those spelling bee kids were also required to play badminton or perform cartwheels while spelling, it could be included with biathlon and chess boxing in a legitimate sports discussion…

  9. #9 |  wsop results |  July 8th, 2005 at 9:51 am

    Be sure to visit wsop results. Thanks for the information, Alex. See also wsop results summary at wsop results http://casino.rtq2.com/wsop-results.html wsop results. Have Fun!