DN> ->->DN>If a computer can beat the world's best at it, it's not a sport
DN> ->->
DN> ->->DN>Chess is a game.
DN> ->->
DN> ->->I disagree with your logic.  Machines can beat the best runner in
DN> ->->race, does that mean racing is not sport?
DN> ->
DN> ->DN>Nothing wrong with my logic.  Machines do not equal computers.
DN> ->
DN> ->Computers are machines.  As are cars.
DN>
DN> Fine.  Let me clarify.
DN>
DN> If an IBM Personal computer, in a stationary form, can beat the world's 
bes
DN> it's not a sport.
Well that counts chess as still being a sport (It was an IBM mainframe that
beat Kasparov)!
Quite frankly I agree that chess is not a sport but your criteria is pretty
dodgy. If we were to use your criteria then one moment we would have a number
of competitive games being sports then all of a sudden when computer power 
gets
strong enough suddenly they are not sports. Real logic that!
Furthermore, who developed the computers? Wasn't it humans?
Regards
Brett
... nfx v3.1 FREEWARE OFFLINE MAIL READER FOR DOS/WINDOWS                    
--- EzyQwk V1.49b2 00F90061
---------------