Every year as I sit and watch the fall sports assembly, I am surprised by a couple of the groups that get included into the preview video.

Among these are Marching Band, De La Cru, and Poms (and the concession stands, but I don’t think I need to get into that).  Personally, I am thankful that these videos are included because I enjoy sitting in the padded chairs of the auditorium and watching the fine productions of our TV department; however, I would like to take the time to remind people that these activities, particularly dancing, are not sports.

To me, there are three characteristics that every sport possesses.  By explaining these three characteristics I think I can clear up why dancing and some other disputable activities just don’t fit my definition of a sport.

First off, a sport inherently involves athletic ability.  This is where I declare that marching band is not a sport (despite that they receive a PE exemption, which I know you all love).  Walking around for two hours does indeed burn calories; I know this because just like everyone else in the world, I do it everyday (though admittedly I probably could not do it in as organized a fashion as you).

Dancing, however, passes this one. Every time I see Poms or De La Cru perform, I am extremely impressed by their flexibility and coordination.  Dancers clearly have to go through strenuous practices to be able to pull off those performances. But that’s just what dancing is, a performance, not a sport.

Dancing does not fit the second requirement of all sports, which is that a sport involves two or more teams/individuals competing against each other.  Now, I know dance competitions exist, but these competitions do not qualify dance as a sport.

These competitions involve multiple teams taking their turns performing their dance;  one team does  their rendition of a  high-tempo mash up of the currently most played pop songs, and then the next team does theirs. Never are two teams performing directly against each other (unless there is an improvisational dance-off part of the competition that I am unaware of, in which case dancing would be a sport and a really cool one, too).

Because two teams are never competing directly against each other, there are no variables except yourself, your teammates, and maybe the ground.

Although dancing may require more athletic ability than badminton, something that badminton players understand that dancers will never understand is what it feels like to be in direct competition with someone else, to have someone else’s performance affect your own.

The final quality of every sport is an objective grading system; when people play a sport, everyone watching knows who won.

Now, I am sure dancing does have some complex grading system, but in the absence of direct competition, some opinions of the judges must seep into the grading process. This is where it moves away from sport and into the realm of a performing art.

So, from reviewing my list of three rules, I can say that dancing passes only one of three characteristics and therefore can be considered an athletic activity, an art, even a competition, but not a sport.  I think that if I was a dancer (and trust me, I don’t have what it takes to be a dancer), I’d be fine with my activity not being called a sport. Performing art sounds cooler anyway.