Can someone help me to understand this concept? In particular, why so many people watch it - what drives them them do so?
I'll try to explain my own vision, why I think I don't care - which, of course, is entirely subjective thing, so despite it may read as such it's not exactly meant to say "[some] pro sports are nonsense" but rather more of "[some] pro sports don't make sense for me".
Say, Olympic games. I can watch the opening ceremony (it can be visually or aesthetically impressive), but I don't care about the actual event. Yea, some folks do some impressive things, that... utterly fail to impress me. I'll try to explain why, and I wonder how others are different in this regard.
I can understand watching sports that have a significant strategy component to them. I would've probably watched Go or chess if I would be able to understand what's going on there (I don't), but I occasionally watch e-sports and those can impress me with how people think outside of the box, doing things that no one thought of - but that are so obvious in the hindsight. For those kind of sports, when I understand the game mechanics and when those feel interesting to me, I can relate and feel engaged.
I have a suspicion that a number of people watch it (among other reasons) for the "this is our athlete(s) doing it" vibe. This is something that doesn't click with me. Never really did when I was a kid (the country I was born in doesn't exist - and good riddance), and since then I've immigrated a few times, so - long story short - save for obligatory subconscious biases, I don't care about other folks' flags and passports. But even though this is not commonplace (I guess), this doesn't feel like a reason why I have no feelings for the Olympics. Back to the e-sports example, I watch international events, and people from different bubbles bringing their different strategies and play styles makes watching fun, as the games are more diverse.
So, when someone's running, jumping, lifting, throwing, shooting, spinning, or alike... I honestly don't get what impresses so many viewers so much everyone and their dog seem to be glued to the screens. Please don't get me wrong, I don't want to diminish athletes' personal (or team) achievements. What they're doing is objectively impressive, but subjectively it's in some... detached, unrelated way. Also, as someone raised on sci-fi I can't shake off the feeling of it being sort of unimportant or meaningless on a global scale - I suppose I'm gonna give post-/trans-human Olympics a try, if I'll live to the day, maybe I'll find something to cheer for. Not sure.
Either way, in the modern day, personally, I don't feel any engagement as I fail to relate with the athlete, leading to the total lack of the entertainment value for me. Best I can do is "uh, that looks fast/heavy/far/...", but 9s, 9.5s, or 12s are all the same for me - just "fast" - nothing in my brain fires off, as I don't have any experience of such speeds/levels of exertion anyway. So I wonder, does it for others, do they subconsciously tighten their muscles watching, do they feel connected or something? Maybe not, because people also watch races and I suppose they don't associate with horses?
As you can see, with all this blabbering and guessing (sorry!) - I'm really confused here. I realize that even if someone explains it to me, I still won't feel that way, but what I'm missing is the idea - I only have guesses, and I have no clue how accurate they are. And I'm curious to understand others, even if a tiniest bit better.
====> tl;dr: If y'all watch the professional sports (esp. if aren't an athlete yourself), what makes you engaged and entertained watching it?
It sounds like you already sort of know the answer.. you are atypical in your ability to relate to sports. You mention a couple times that it just doesn't "click" for you, and fair enough, but it might just be one of those things where you need to recognize (which you already seem to) that you hold a minority opinion.
> [You] occasionally watch e-sports and those can impress me with how people think outside of the box, doing things that no one thought of - but that are so obvious in the hindsight
This happens literally all the time in professional athletics. Strategy, and the creativity required, is absolutely at the core of any team sport - what else do you think coaches (who are paid in excess of $10m in many sports) exist at all if not for coming up with out of the box strategy? Football strategy is a constantly evolving thing, from one week to the next. There are other sports (like tennis) where strategy can change within a singular point, let alone across the whole match.
The human connection element of sports is also very real, following an individual because you like their personality or style of play is just being a fan and is based in admiration - something that is seemingly inherently human.
> I honestly don't get what impresses so many viewers so much
I mean this statement about olympic sports just begs for the reciprocal (and much more common) question of what about e-sports impresses anyone? The literal exact same arguments can be made. "uh, that looks complicated/fast-paced..." but games are all the same to me, it's all just pressing buttons - nothing in my brain fires off.
And because the same arguments can be made, maybe just assume that for as passionately as you would defend e-sports for it's creativity or strategy or whatever else, that exists in essentially the same form mirrored over in the sports world. It's the same "argument" happening, just mirrored.
> raised on sci-fi I can't shake off the feeling of it being sort of unimportant or meaningless on a global scale
There's maybe a whole separate conversation about how fantasy over-emphasizes things like the fate of humanity or how it depicts unachievable utopias under the guise of like... here's what societal advancement could look like unencumbered by the realities of actual society? There's a reason sports/games have existed since prehistoric times - I'd put all my money in on betting that there's no Star Trek future that doesn't have sports. It's just that important. You don't have to "get" it, but surely looking at the widespread popularity makes it obvious that's true?
> It sounds like you already sort of know the answer.
Maybe, but I'm also sort of stupid. Which prompted me to write all this, so maybe I'll figure it out for myself (and, hopefully, others too - surely, I'm not unique in this regard).
> where you need to recognize (which you already seem to) that you hold a minority opinion.
Yea... I had this assumption as a possible truth, but I have no idea how true is it ("am I sure?"), and what exactly is different ("why?").
> Strategy, and the creativity required, is absolutely at the core of any team sport
For sure, although I originally thought more about individual disciplines, like the 100m sprints (the primary topic here), which surely have some strategy to them as well, but I would be very surprised if it's something complex.
So I'm not even sure if people are watching sports because they relate with the athletes. Certainly not universally, and I have no idea how much it is the case.
Even with the team sports, I'm confused:
> "uh, that looks complicated/fast-paced..." but games are all the same to me, it's all just pressing buttons - nothing in my brain fires off.
Thank you for this. It totally makes sense to me, but this is also one thing that makes me question the "minority opinion" hypothesis. I haven't explicitly went into details and just barely touched that with "I don't have experience running fast so I cannot relate with runners - no clue what they're doing" idea, but I thought about it and it confused me.
I brought e-sports to the picture, because it's relatively (compared to pro non-e-sports) niche thing. I believe they are interesting to me because I can actually understand what's going on there. Just like that chess example (I don't watch chess because I don't play it) - I can watch a football or basketball or tennis match and have no idea on what the players are doing out there even if I know the rules. So I made a logical conclusion that to watch sports, one must likely understand it. And for understanding something, surely one needs to have some experience in the matter (at amateur level)? This all definitely feels true for e-sports - while one may not perform at the level - anyone can try things out (and save for extra-complex micro-level mechanics that require physical dexterity can even make it work... occasionally).
And this is where it doesn't click. I always had an assumption that e-sports are niche because player base is low (compared to the overall population numbers). Folks who play $game may watch $game tournaments, some may not play but watch with friends (rarely) - and I guess that's about it. So I tried to find the numbers, comparing involvement with engagement.
And I found a statement that about 72% of Americans watch American football, and a statement that only 5-6M people are playing it. So, there are drastically more viewers than players. For comparison, I looked up stats for Dota 2 and found that TI10 (the Super Bowl equivalent) had 2.7M peak viewer count, and there is around 14M MAU. I looked up other games and it all seems that viewer count << MAU for e-sports, while the inverse is true for non-e-sports.
Which seem to invalidate my hypothesis of "should play to watch". And that generates a lot of questions (from "why is it so different", though "am I actually right assuming that people understand what they're watching?" to "if you don't play, why learn the game?" and so on).
And the same (back to the original topic of individual disciplines) applies to the 100m sprints. Can't find the breakdowns, but it seems that there are still drastically more viewers than people who run in any capacity. Here I'm back to "our athlete vs others", as I don't have any better ideas how to explain it.
I sort of feel that the answer that makes sense is somewhere out there, really close - yet I'm still honestly confused and can't really grasp it. Sorry.
> I'd put all my money in on betting that there's no Star Trek future that doesn't have sports
Haha, no, I won't take that bet. The idea of sports may change depending on what kind of future is out there, but competition is deeply ingrained in our human nature. But the modern idea sports may not survive, especially as more people start to debate what's "natural" and what's "doping".
I'll try to explain my own vision, why I think I don't care - which, of course, is entirely subjective thing, so despite it may read as such it's not exactly meant to say "[some] pro sports are nonsense" but rather more of "[some] pro sports don't make sense for me".
Say, Olympic games. I can watch the opening ceremony (it can be visually or aesthetically impressive), but I don't care about the actual event. Yea, some folks do some impressive things, that... utterly fail to impress me. I'll try to explain why, and I wonder how others are different in this regard.
I can understand watching sports that have a significant strategy component to them. I would've probably watched Go or chess if I would be able to understand what's going on there (I don't), but I occasionally watch e-sports and those can impress me with how people think outside of the box, doing things that no one thought of - but that are so obvious in the hindsight. For those kind of sports, when I understand the game mechanics and when those feel interesting to me, I can relate and feel engaged.
I have a suspicion that a number of people watch it (among other reasons) for the "this is our athlete(s) doing it" vibe. This is something that doesn't click with me. Never really did when I was a kid (the country I was born in doesn't exist - and good riddance), and since then I've immigrated a few times, so - long story short - save for obligatory subconscious biases, I don't care about other folks' flags and passports. But even though this is not commonplace (I guess), this doesn't feel like a reason why I have no feelings for the Olympics. Back to the e-sports example, I watch international events, and people from different bubbles bringing their different strategies and play styles makes watching fun, as the games are more diverse.
So, when someone's running, jumping, lifting, throwing, shooting, spinning, or alike... I honestly don't get what impresses so many viewers so much everyone and their dog seem to be glued to the screens. Please don't get me wrong, I don't want to diminish athletes' personal (or team) achievements. What they're doing is objectively impressive, but subjectively it's in some... detached, unrelated way. Also, as someone raised on sci-fi I can't shake off the feeling of it being sort of unimportant or meaningless on a global scale - I suppose I'm gonna give post-/trans-human Olympics a try, if I'll live to the day, maybe I'll find something to cheer for. Not sure.
Either way, in the modern day, personally, I don't feel any engagement as I fail to relate with the athlete, leading to the total lack of the entertainment value for me. Best I can do is "uh, that looks fast/heavy/far/...", but 9s, 9.5s, or 12s are all the same for me - just "fast" - nothing in my brain fires off, as I don't have any experience of such speeds/levels of exertion anyway. So I wonder, does it for others, do they subconsciously tighten their muscles watching, do they feel connected or something? Maybe not, because people also watch races and I suppose they don't associate with horses?
As you can see, with all this blabbering and guessing (sorry!) - I'm really confused here. I realize that even if someone explains it to me, I still won't feel that way, but what I'm missing is the idea - I only have guesses, and I have no clue how accurate they are. And I'm curious to understand others, even if a tiniest bit better.
====> tl;dr: If y'all watch the professional sports (esp. if aren't an athlete yourself), what makes you engaged and entertained watching it?
Thanks!