Sergio's definition of a sport reminds me rather of mine, however mine definitely includes baseball. Also definitely includes many of the games he excluded.

How's this: "Sport" can be defined as a contest between teams or individuals that requires specific physical skills (differing from one sport to another) where success (winning or losing or placing) can be determined by some completely objective measure.

Races of any kind are obviously sports. Whether they be long distance or short, they each require specific sets of physical abilities and success can be measured completely objectively: who crosses the finish line first.

Same with the field events of jumping and throwing. The measure being a tape measure.

Baseball is definitely a sport. The physical skills are very different from track and field events or football (soccer), but skills they definitely are. (Serge, if you think it's easy to hit a ball thrown at you at over 140 kph [~87 mph], come to America and make your fortune. And yes, I'm 100% serious!) The measure: How many men for each team cross home plate.

Soccer certainly fits. How many times does the ball go through the goal?

Interestingly enough, several Olympic "sports" (some I like and others I don't) definitely do NOT fit this definition. Gymnastics, figure skating, diving, synchronized swimming, ballroom dancing (???!!!) all have VERY subjective measures of success. That's why they have several judges and extremes of their opinions are thrown out of the final score. All of these require physical skills, but the lack of a objective measure of success makes them, IMO (I don't have humble ones), something other than "sport".

BB, NightWing