Why Sledge?

No matter what the sport, "Sledging", or trash talk, has become a key part of the game. While a majority of athletes may not be known for their trash talk, the few that are are constantly in the public eye (i.e. Terrell Owens, Chad Johnson, any international soccer player). Yet why do athletes feel it is necessary to incorporate this kind of behavior into the game?
There are, as there always are, two sides to the argument. Trash-talkers say that, by using only words, they can take their opponent of their game. They say that they will use whatever they can to get an advantadge in today's game. And this can be affective, as was seen by Zinedine Zidana's "headbutt heard 'round the world". Another attribute crap-slangers may find is that by talking themselves up, they play better. This arguement, the "putting another person down to make myself feel better", while not publicly supported by the talkers themselves, cannot be ignored as yet another tactic for the athlete to elevate their level of play.
Those who choose not to sledge must have their reasons, too. Many say that by saying nothing at all to those who incessantly chatter, the chatterer themself is thrown off their game. Others, including this author, claim that the only thing a trash-talker accomplishes is to make them want to beat them that much more. Often times coaches will use the trash talk of another team to get their players motivated for next week's game.

So, should a player trash-talk? I feel that trash talk has no place in sports. Sledging is a tool athletes claim to use as a way to take control of a situation, but many are clearly looking for media face time. It shows in no way a mental aspect of the game, either, for anyone can call their opponent a monkey's uncle. Showing the cool reservation of letting a player's actions speak for them is both more effective than trash talk, and more beneficial to their teammates.

What makes sport a sport?

Turn on the TV nowadays, and one cannot help but find some form of poker on ESPN or some other sports program. But is poker really a sport? Shouldn't that be on a different channel?
Proponents of poker's "sportism" claim that the physical and mental strain required to endure a long tournament and deal with stressful situations are synominous to the strain endured in other sports. They say that the participants train just like any other sport, and no on e can argue that the great poker players don't receive the kind of money that any other sport has come to accept. The strategy involved with knowing whether or not to call a bluff mirrors the strategy used by coaches in other sports. The participants are entitled players, not members or entries, but are they really "athletes"?
A friend of mine describes a sport as, "something you can pull a hamstring doing,". No one expects a poker player to do any such thing, with most of the action occuring with each player remaining comfortably in their seat, or maybe standing briefly to stretch. Poker success also does not require any athletic ability, or what is generally accepted as athletic ability, as was proven by 2005 World Series of Poker (notice the sports tie to baseball) and grossly overweight Greg Raimer.
So, what makes sport a sport? Is it physical fitness and ability, or is talent and mental strain? Either way, it looks like Poker is here to stay.

Philosophy of sport

What exactly does the phrase, "the philosophy of sport" mean? The two words are not usually associated, with sports concerning subject matter much less complicated than the world of philosophy. For me, the philosophy of sport refers to all the aspects of sports around the world that people have come to love, whether it be the hard work required to suceed when laying a sport, the dedication and the mental strain required to sucessfully coach a sport, and the unexplainable feelings of the commited fan to their team. The Philosophy of sport embodies the entire realm that is sports in our world today.