Widely mis-attributed to Ernest Hemingway but more likely the product of Barnaby Conrad, a writer of the same era as Hemingway.

It is a matter of risk. If you are risking your life while doing something for fun then it is a sport.
Not willing to risk your life? Then it is just a game.

I do not see why there is even a need to define mans contests as sport or not.

‘Course, baseball also relies on umps who call balls and strikes, safe and out — and that’s pretty subjective. oh, and I guess football, basketball, soccer, hockey all have refs, too. Gee, I guess no sport with rules is not “subjective” at some point, and that’s a compromise those of us who have a broader definition of the “Wide World of Sports” can handle.”

Boxing I’ll concede because it uses judges (although, when you knock a guy out it’s pretty clear you’re the winner of the fight), but you seem to misunderstand the role of a referee in the other sports. Of course, there are moments in these contests that give referees room for their judgement to make a call for or against a competitor… but only when there is a violation of the rules of competition.

When it comes to the scoring of points to determine a winner, however, those rules are unquestionably clear.

Did the football cross the plane of the goal? Yes? That’s six points. Did the kick split the uprights? No? Sorry… no points awarded. This scoring system is the same every time in every game. So there’s no need to worry about the French or Russian awarding more or less points accordingly.

Balls and strikes, safe and outs are also clearly defined. Throw the ball within the confines of this box and it’s a strike, otherwise it’s not. Did the runner reach the base before the ball? Yes? That player is safe. Score a point when the runner crosses home. There are no degrees of safety, no deductions for technical deficiency on wicked sliders.

In wrestling, when you hold your opponent’s shoulder blades to the mat for three seconds, you win. You score points by taking him to the mat, escaping him and taking control from him, and exposing his back to the mat for a specific number of seconds. No concern is ever paid to the symmetry or appearance of a competitor’s body.

In hockey and soccer, it can’t get any easier than the puck/ball crossing the goal line. No subjectivity there. Either it did or it didn’t.

Age-old argument, and as a skater myself, I’m glad you at least gave a nod to the athleticism and dedication. Your argument is a veiled “dis,” as if your narrow definition of what is “sport” means anything. There really is no other way to have an event that rewards the athleticism and dedication of athletes whose sports come down to a judgment.

I suppose under your definition boxing and wrestling are not sports either because they rely on a human to make the call as to who wins.

‘Course, baseball also relies on umps who call balls and strikes, safe and out — and that’s pretty subjective. oh, and I guess football, basketball, soccer, hockey all have refs, too. Gee, I guess no sport with rules is not “subjective” at some point, and that’s a compromise those of us who have a broader definition of the “Wide World of Sports” can handle.

To me, there is no doubt that bodybuilding is a sport, just as the others are, and when a computer is invented that can measure the performance of an athlete in achieving closer to an agreed upon standard of perfection, if those are the rules, then by your logic, you will have to agree too.