Well then by all means, explain why!
I've spent a lot of time thinking about how to answer this without being too vague. I guess let me put it this way - given unlimited time and resources (instructors, willing opponents, etc) I feel pretty confident that after maybe a few years of practicing a video game nonstop I would be able to at least put up a fight with any of the best players.
Likewise no amount of time, energy, help, practice, coaching, etc, could ever in my life result in me being even close in ability to the worst football player in the league.
Is a athlete to be honored then for their genetic predisposition to the sport? Is it that you feel your are physically unable to run that fast or catch a ball whilst running? Why then not celebrate the reaction time and split-second decision making and co-ordination required to accel and pwn at video games; not everyone can think and react that quickly. My Office mate, Kenji, was a national champion at the Fighting Game Guilty Gear, and playing him in that game and street fighter, I've learned that my reaction time just isn't the same as his. I'm all of a couple milliseconds slower, it would seem, and I'd chalk that up to genetics.
What seems to be celebrated more so than who is in better shape in a sport is the effectiveness of a player, as an individual and as teammate; for personal skill and strength at the set activity, and being able to interpret and react to situations and crises that arise on the field. I do not have any scientific studies to back this up, but it makes sense to me that during a game, a player in Sports and a player in Video games has the same areas of the brain working; Problem solving, reaction, and execution, among many others I'm sure.
The Athelete in soccer, say, must solve the problem of getting the ball down the field, either personally, or with the assistance of the teammate. This requires spacial awareness, understanding of one's physical limitations and of the limitations and abilities of opponents on the field, as well as the limitations of the ball itself (how far it can be kicked in relation to how long it would take to kick the ball.
A Geekleet (lol funny name) in a fighting game, must solve the problem of pushing down the life bar of his opponent without losing his own, which requires understanding of the opponent's limitations and abilities that are defined in the game, and thereby the spacial awareness of the set 'field of play.' The Geekleet must also be aware of his own character's limitations and abilites.
Both must react (particularly in fighting games and high speed sports like soccer or badminton) quickly and appropriately, with a high level of execution, to maximize the impact of their actions, wether that be shooting a ball in the upper left hand corner of the goal, or executing a string of attacks to maximize the amount of damage done.
Competitive Video games simply take out the physical, temporal aspect of Sports, while Sports take out some of the more long term thinking that perhaps video games require. A Linebacker relies on brute strength and split reaction, and rarely needs to think more than 30 seconds into the future. A game of Starcraft, or Company of Heroes, however, requires reconnaissance and information interpretation, followed by planning several minutes into the future. Nuance in football is reacting to the shifting weight of the running quarterback in order to predict his actions and to intercept. Nuance in Starcraft is noting the enemy's build order, or how a base is set up, or where they are expanding, wether they are rushing to air superiority and reacting accordingly with the best counter.
* * *
Its a tough topic to nail down for sure. in writing the post I got to thinking a lot about a variety of different things involving video games and sports, and the sort of two ends of a binary that they become. More deeply, I began to think about the deep seeded prejudice that some people seem to have against nerds, and people who heavily play videogames in general. A lot of the derision is based, I think, around pride and ego of one's strengths. There is a stereotype that many Atheletes, thanks to the amount of time they dedicate to the sport they play, are relatively stupid or slightly unintelligent; uneducated. There is a stereotype that many Nerds, thanks to the amount of time they dedicate to the video game, or bit of technology they specialize in, will be fat, unfit, and weak. I'm sure you know some super athletic people who are pretty smart people, and I'm sure you know geeky people who aren't the least bit fat, and could run Marathons, or who play sports often. I know a LOT of people where I work, who are in incredible shape, and could also kick my ass in Company of Heroes or Call of Duty. I know a lot of people who suck at sports and suck at videogames -- but are better in other areas, but since those are perhaps productive to society, we'll leave that factor out.
Being that both types of games, Video and Sports, are unproductive towards society, why then is one any less admirable than the other? The military has recently begun to try to recruit people who go to videogame tournaments, to fly robot aircraft or drive ground robots, or even for military strategy ... clearly something is valued in a video gamer ... why then does physical prowess take precedence?
I'm not well versed on this next bit, but again, it makes sense to me. Homophobia, in essence, breaks down to Mysoginy and Chauvinism. Being coupled with a male is a feminine thing, being homosexual is feminine and therefore unmanly, and to be looked down upon. Homosexuals are often very feminine and androgynous, and the hatred arises from that division of gender and appearance, and what some consider 'right.' This paragraph could be better.
I think the derision towards videogames comes from a similar psychological phenomenon, reinforced with basic human attraction rules. Women tend to be attracted to masculinity (broad statement, I know ... this'll be filled with generalizations) wether it be physical or social, and that might first manifest itself during puberty, when the human body is changing and the change is clear and noticed by all. Since intelligence or mental ability doesn't manifest itself in a way that can easily be noticed, like physical strength or wealth, it gets de-prioritized. Since wealth is not always a factor on the minds of people who are still in middle school, strength and physical appearance then becomes the more accessible trait for attraction, particularly because of the changes that occur during puberty - the sudden, physical differences between the genders. At that age intelligence is not always something thats valued, even if its recognized, because it is not relevant to the primal ramifications that the sudden influx of hormones bring. Intelligence comes into play later in life, as does wealth.
The result is that males who are genetically predisposed to be thinner or to grow later than anyone may not be the best at sports because of physical limitations, and as such, are discouraged, and find other things to become passionate about. Furthermore, some people just aren't interested in playing sports, and instead find computers or mechanics or science. Those who play videogames (nerds, hereafter) compound the lack of physical prowess because most videogames are barely physical, and while an active brain does burn calories, it cannot compete with the entire body being active. Some get fat. Some don't because of metabolism or diet, but they become skinny or undefined, undeveloped, and at a time when social status in the hierarchy of tweens and teens is defined first by looks and athletic performance, this appearance becomes a Feminine thing! Multiply that by the derision of the weak that the athletic tend to have (through conditioning and a win-or-lose mentality), and I think we've come to the beginning of labeling nerds, and videogames by association as 'pathetic.'
This is only the beginning however. Later on, in say high school, where being social and 'cool' is key to popularity, we find the nerds who weren't sports stars further ostracized because of the generally speaking antisocial nature of video games. Even multiplayer games, with possibly the exception of console games or LAN parties are antisocial to a degree - conversing with someone on the phone is not half as conducive to communication as standing in front of the person, and conversing via text is not half as conducive as phone conversation. Furthermore, most women don't find videogames nearly as addicting or interesting as guys do - why that is, would be another discussion, but the result is relevant; male nerds don't have skill or experience talking with females, and as such are not confident doing so, or learning to do so. Our nerds arent up to snuff on social interaction like the jocks are, who have been forced by the nature of sports and the attention they got during puberty to learn to interact and socialize. The nerds are further ostracized because not only are they unmasculine in a physical manner, but also in a social manner - being awkward and shy isn't a masculine trait.
So what I think this boils down to is the fact that Sports are considered Masculine, and Videogames are considered Feminine, and "surely a female athlete cannot compare to a male one"
We know this isn't true, however.
Subconsciously perhaps, I think, you're putting the videogames beneath sports and not at the same level because of their inverse relation to physical strength, thus masculinity, and thereby attractiveness to the opposite gender.
though i could be wrong :P
.
