Its definitely not baseball. Baseball is virtually a sport where the manager does not matter. Its definitely not basketball because its to player driven. So it has to be football....but...they probably have the dumbest players of any sport.

Probably football, yeah.

Agreed. As far as a spectator, I'd say to really understand football and what every position is supposed to be doing in different situations takes more brainpower than baseball, basketball, hockey, or soccer. I've been a hardcore football fan for my whole life, and there's still some stuff that I don't understand. When you talk about gaps, blocking schemes, defensive schemes...your average football fan has no idea what any of that shit means. And I'm certainly no expert on all of it either. It would have helped if I ever played organized football probably.

well as a spectator, i think the more you are familiar with THAT particular sport the 'better' you are at spectating......I don't think spectating really requires much intelligence........the rules of football/baseball are perhaps more complex than other games......but all games have nuances that need explanation to the uninitiated....

/shrug

Sounds about right to me. Golf is about tons and tons of practice, until you learn what each of your clubs does for you, and until your swing is all muscle memory.

I think most of the intellectual side of the game is not doubting yourself and not second-guessing yourself. I also think people watch way too much PGA and spend way too much time "thinking" before their shots. I find it's often counter-productive.

But that's just my opinion, and I barely play these days.

I'm not sure that pool (billiards) doesn't involve more thinking in a strategy/shot selection sense than golf.

I have a friend who is really clueless when it comes to all sports. He's interested enough to watch with me when he comes over, and I'd definitely say I have to explain more things to him with football. He's the inquisitive type, and he certainly asks a lot more questions when we watch football compared to baseball or basketball.

exactly... i really wasn't trying to nit pick or split hairs.......golf is all about the internal/mental/battle against self ...... but to me its not the same as an intellectual affair...

I think a battle of intellect requires opposing ideas........in a sense football (like chess) is a battle of ideas....yours against another person's

Golf is more like overcoming nerves or being perfectly calm, or having perfect consistent mechanics.........battling your own mind/body.

well i am totally biased but to me football is a near perfect game for this reason 8-)

it really is deep....like chess...and like you said before...it goes deeper and deeper like gaps and zones and audibles etc....

you should check out some chess

LOL

Sorry for the confusion, allow me to reiterate.

It is a fact that Football came from Rugby, in fact, there was a time in football where the Forward pass wasn't allowed, which makes everything you just said that differentiated the comparison, moot.

Competitive golf, which you seem to have failed to read in my post, is more than Zen or Harmony.

Just playing for the hell of it, takes no intellect like you've stated.

Playing in an attempt to meet par, break par, or to compete and beat everyone, on the other hand, requires a completely different analysis to look at the game.

Trust me when I say this, playing all of the sports I've mentioned, you'll never think more or be subject to nerves more, than in competitive Golf. It is a sport defined by the thought.

Arbitrarily saying that it requires little thought other than club selection is the most ignorant and stupid thing I've ever heard in regards to the game.

In order to make club selection alone you must factor in the elevation change from tee/fairway/position to green, wind, moisture, shot shape, whether you'll be making a full swing or a 3/4 swing, whether you're imparting maximum backspin at all, or which shot type you're going for.

All of that requires a very analytical mind to be GOOD at, to be COMPETITIVE at. There's already more thought in the club selection alone, than I've ever spent playing any of the other 5 sports.

Almost everything by comparison comes down to second nature training, in fact, most team sports try hard to remove all "analytical thought" from the game, except for in the occurrence of rare skill positions; Quarterbacks, Pitchers, Point Guards, etc.

You probably should have stated "As a spectator" loooooooooooong before you made this thread, and reiterated that point many times.

As a spectator, that's a hard one to define for "thinking".

What precisely are we trying to accomplish by "thinking" as a spectator?

Are we trying to anticipate play calling? General Outcomes? What?

Apparently I'm going to have to keep score for those who can't read the part where I said "Competitive".

As for your comment that Pool might take more thinking or strategy on shot selection, I'm sorry to come off vulgar, but you're ****ing stupid and clearly never played golf, golf well, or competitively. LMAO

And that's that's the mental game before the analytical game takes place.

Shot selection alone takes more analytical skills than any other game, period. Then you get into the planning of your round.

In competitive golf, or if you're just a really, really good golfer, you'll take the time ahead of your round to strategize how you will attack the course for that round. Every single shot, including shot types so that if you don't execute the shot, you'll have the highest percentage of bailing yourself out, etc.

I should just probably stop now.

It is becoming rapidly and abundantly clear now that none of you have ever played Golf well enough to play it competitively, and most of you suffer from a general lack of reading comprehension when it comes to reading the part where I said "competitive" in my reference to golf.

Forget the battle of your inner demons and Tin Cup/Happy Gilmore shenanigans about Zen and Harmony, that's only one aspect of the game, and one that is present from the first round. From there, simply learning how to hit a shot is more analytical than any other sport, because you need to master math and science to truly understand it.

Also, understand that when I say "hit a shot", I'm not talking about taking a swing at a ball. I'm talking about trying to hit a 189 yard draw, over a branch with 28 yards of draw, 13 feet above the green into a 13 mile an hour wind, on an incredibly dry day.

Not, "hey bob, hold my beer and watch me whack this".

I'm speaking from a competitive narrative only, as it is the only way to compare a team sport which can only be played in competition to an individual sport that can be played wherever and whenever.

As a spectator IMO it'd definitely be Football. The complexity of the rules and number of penalties etc makes it difficult to learn from scratch.

The philosophy of games (as per mcan)

Most games have at least an element of pure chance to them. Chance built into a game is what makes the game easier for a beginner to be successful. A game of PURE chance means that there are NO other considerations to the game (the card game WAR, Shoots and Ladders, The lotto, slot machines, etc...) None of these games require/allow decision making or execution of strategy by a player. They play their game, take their turn, roll their dice/spin a wheel, and follow the directions and rules to see what happens to them. Games of this nature, are simply and utterly nothing more than a glorified or complicated coin flip.

The two elements of a game that elevate the game past the 'pure chance' category are decision making, and execution of that decision making. These types of games are MUCH more interesting and rewarding for the player, and especially the winning the player. I will call these types of games "skill games."


There are THREE categories to consider about a skill game.


SKILL, ABILITY, STRATEGY

**There is a subtle difference between the way I mean "skill" above and the overall blanket term 'skill game.' The phrase "skill game" is only meant to connotate that the game is NOT a game of 'pure chance.' Traditionally, the colloquial term "skill" is used by poker players who have tried to convince lawmakers that poker should be made legal, and is not pure "gambling" as many house casino games are. I like this term, and use it here**

I use these terms as distinctly different things, loosely as follows:

"skill" is a learned and seasoned technique/behavior. Hitting a golf ball cleanly and making it go where you want it to go is a "skill."

"ability" is distinct from skill, because it is based on prowess. Hitting a golf ball farther, than someone else of comparable skill means you have the same skill, but more ability (in this case you are stronger or have a faster swing).

"strategy" is fairly self explanatory. It is the plan of action, whether that plan be made well in advance, or on the fly. (you plan to lay up onto the fairway instead of going for the green). In many games, you'll find that strategy is inversely related to luck/chance, if indeed the game still has any luck built into it.


With this foundation, the question "which game is more of a thinking man's game" is easier to tackle.

Golf: golf is overwhelmingly a game dominated by skill and not by strategy. Most of the "thinking" in golf is no more complicated than "what do I do to get that ball as close as I can." On occasion, a player might think that setting up an easier next shot, that is farther away is a better decision than putting the ball as close as they can get. But this is hardly complicated. The hard part of golf is clearly, being able to hit the ball and make it go where you want it to go. this is not "thinking."

Baseball: Again, the vast vast vast majority of this sport is NOT strategy based. There are SOME strategic elements to the game, but their overall importance is dwarfed by player skills and abilities. Hitting, throwing, catching, and running are the core of baseball. And 9 players who can do this, with no strategy at all, will beat the snot out of 9 players with a great strategy and no ability or skills. Or if you want a less exaggerated example, in any game 7 of a world series, having a great strategy going into the game can NOT make up for your pitcher having a bad night.

Football: This sport is interesting, because on its face, it's a game that values a players' overall strength and athletic ability much more than baseball. Skill is devalued somewhat (except by certain positions which are actually designated as "skill positions"). But it seems that overall strategy is paramount to football in a way it is not in most other major sports. Strategy can and often DOES overcome weaknesses in the ability of your own team and capitalizes on the weaknesses in the other team. Still, there is a minimum threshold of ability a player needs in order to be able to compete... So no, it's not a pure "thinking mans" game, but I think its much closer than baseball.

Chess: This is the prototype "thinking mans" game. It also illustrates the nature of the word "skill." Colloquially, we call it a "skill" game, and many people use this kind of language to describe how good a chess player is. But according to my categories, I would call this ALL strategy. Thinking that your queen should move to D5 is the immediate strategy, and no consideration should be made as regards to how you're going to move the piece there. There are few sports that have this unique "strategy only" type of play.

I always find it to be a shame when people can't make a point without descending into personal attacks. Disappointing.

FYI I didn't (and still haven't) read whatever it is that you think I'm responding to. I have no idea why you're going off on me. I was responding to someone else.

I just think pool can be extremely difficult to play. There's a whole aspect to that game that golf just does not have. You don't really play golf defensively in quite the same way, leaving shots on the table in an effort to force your opponent into a bad position. There can be an unbelievable amount of strategy involved. Although I'm obviously not talking about $5 pitcher night at the local watering hole.

In golf, I've always found that's more about playing against myself. Sure your opponent can get in your head and vice versa, but again that's more a matter of mental strength as opposed to strategy. I'm always playing against myself, regardless of what the rest of my group is doing, knowing and pushing my own limits.

But, no, I don't play very often. And I won't ever play competitively. I'm not really a competitive kind of person. But that doesn't mean I can't have a philosophical grasp on a game, whether it's golf or football or tic-tac-toe.