Sports fans love to debate whether any given activity is a "sport" or whether the people participating in it are "athletes."  I frequently encounter these arguments when I start talking about racing.  I don't think I've ever changed anyone's mind, nor have they changed mine. 

But it is an interesting question.  Why do we collectively recognize some activities as sports without question, but can't agree on others as a "sport" or "non-sport." Or as the participants as "athletes" or "non-athletes"?

There is little contention that football, basketball, baseball, or swimming are sports, and the people competing in them are athletes.  The sheer physical strength and agility required leaves little room for doubt. 

But mere use of your muscles does not make one an athlete - otherwise, we'd all agree that construction workers, landscapers or factory workers were athletes.  Dancers use strength and agility - does that make them athletes? 

So if the equation is athlete = strength/agility +___something__.   Perhaps skill?  Are golfers athletes?  What about archers or marksmen?  I'm sure they have strength and agility, but to a lesser degree than say a boxer.  Clearly they have skills.  Tiger Woods has amazing eye-hand coordination.  So do most grade school students who play video games.  Are they athletes?  Are poker players athletes? 

Does athlete = strength/agility + skill  + competition?  Or does competition alone make something a "sport"?  The most competitive  processes I have gone through (sit down for this) were musical theater auditions.  Yup - those actor/dancers are cut-throat.  More than any softball player, basketball player or volleyball squad could dream to be.  I think this is because "sporting" activities have a predetermined outcome - the team wants to win and the way to do it is to score points - hopefully together as a team.  In theater, the creativity involved means the audience doesn't know what its missing if Miss A gets the part instead of Miss B.  Mere competition doesn't make one an athlete - or all those Hooters girls & Miss America are automatically athletes.  I, for one, am not ready for that.

Does inclusion in the olympics automatically make an activity a sport?  Should it?  Is worldwide recognition and acceptance what defines something as a sport and its participants athletes? 

Does body position preclude an activity from being a sport?  Some argue that sitting down, as when driving a car, makes an activity not a sport.  But then what about rowing?  What about individuals who have disabilities that prevent them from doing anything but be seated - can they never be athletes?

If something has entertainment value - like the WWE - does that mean the performers are not athletes?

I don't know all the answers, but the question intrigues me.