I think this is a good idea. "Sports and Fitness" or "Fitness and Sports" is a good solid scope with nutrition allowed peripherally only as it relates to athletic performance.

Nutrition without a strict scope limit will get a ton of junk questions unless you can get a strong nutrition expert community onto it. There's a lot of sports and/or fitness people that know enough about nutrition to give answers related to losing weight or improving athletic performance, but that probably doesn't overlap much with general nutrition expertise. Nutrition should be its own site.

To give an example for a sport that already has a fully-launched site of its own:

Let's say I'm a cyclist. There's either a big organized ride (endurance, hard to finish at all) or maybe a race. Assuming a typical mixed-terrain ride, if I want to improve my speed on that I can:

• Improve various aspects of my cycling technique (improve pedaling technique, improve techniques for cornering and braking so I can go down hills faster, etc etc)
• For races, there's various things related to rules. Some races have drafting, some it's forbidden, and there's likely rules around it either way.
• Change my "fit" on the bike (move saddle, bars, etc)
• Lose weight
• Build leg strength
• Build endurance
• Work on lactate threshold
• Build core strength
• Improve flexibility
• Make a variety of equipment changes that don't change my positioning (lighter bike, more aerodynamic bike, smoother rolling wheels, various drivetrain changes)
• Make equipment changes that require more core strength and flexibility (lower handlebars)

All those things work together. Closely together. It's common in cycling to talk about "watts per kilogram" because that's really the key performance metric. Good climbers have a very high watt to kilogram ratio, while good sprinters have a good wattage (basically). And fitting to a more aerodynamic position requires flexibility and strength.

Talking about any one of those things in isolation would be useless. If I improve my power output by 1% and put on 2% weight doing it, I'll do 1% worse not 1% better. A site where all of those things are in scope seems right.

If my goal is to get over that hill as fast as possible, the answers might be the same whether it's part of a race, an organized ride, a casual ride with friends, competing against the times other people have recorded on Strava or me competing against my own best time.

And the answers for handling a long ride will have a ton of overlap, whether it's a competitive endurance event, or just a weekend fun ride with no competition.

However, if it is a race, there may be rules that affect what choices I can make. There's all sorts of equipment limitations in the different types of bicycle racing.

When I'm looking for a place to ask questions about improving my performance, I don't want to have to know whether changing what I eat, equipment changes or specific exercises are my best chance to improve before even asking the question. A single site where I can ask and get answers that cover either or both is great.

Obviously for my actual example, all of that would be allowed on Bicycles.SE. But what about another sport?

For many athletic activities, there's an interlocking overlap between improving your overall fitness, specific fitness targets, equipment, food, hydration, rules, conventions and history.

I think this is a good idea. "Sports and Fitness" or "Fitness and Sports" is a good solid scope with nutrition allowed peripherally only as it relates to athletic performance.

Nutrition without a strict scope limit will get a ton of junk questions unless you can get a strong nutrition expert community onto it. There's a lot of sports and/or fitness people that know enough about nutrition to give answers related to losing weight or improving athletic performance, but that probably doesn't overlap much with general nutrition expertise. Nutrition should be its own site.

To give an example for a sport that already has a fully-launched site of its own:

Let's say I'm a cyclist. There's either a big organized ride (endurance, hard to finish at all) or maybe a race. Assuming a typical mixed-terrain ride, if I want to improve my speed on that I can:

• Improve various aspects of my cycling technique (improve pedaling technique, improve techniques for cornering and braking so I can go down hills faster, etc etc)
• For races, there's various things related to rules. Some races have drafting, some it's forbidden, and there's likely rules around it either way.
• Change my "fit" on the bike (move saddle, bars, etc)
• Lose weight
• Build leg strength
• Build endurance
• Work on lactate threshold
• Build core strength
• Improve flexibility
• Make a variety of equipment changes that don't change my positioning (lighter bike, more aerodynamic bike, smoother rolling wheels, various drivetrain changes)
• Make equipment changes that require more core strength and flexibility (lower handlebars)

All those things work together. Closely together. It's common in cycling to talk about "watts per kilogram" because that's really the key performance metric. Good climbers have a very high watt to kilogram ratio, while good sprinters have a good wattage (basically). And fitting to a more aerodynamic position requires flexibility and strength.

Talking about any one of those things in isolation would be useless. If I improve my power output by 1% and put on 2% weight doing it, I'll do 1% worse not 1% better. A site where all of those things are in scope seems right.

If my goal is to get over that hill as fast as possible, the answers might be the same whether it's part of a race, an organized ride, a casual ride with friends, competing against the times other people have recorded on Strava or me competing against my own best time.

And the answers for handling a long ride will have a ton of overlap, whether it's a competitive endurance event, or just a weekend fun ride with no competition.

However, if it is a race, there may be rules that affect what choices I can make. There's all sorts of equipment limitations in the different types of bicycle racing.

When I'm looking for a place to ask questions about improving my performance, I don't want to have to know whether changing what I eat, equipment changes or specific exercises are my best chance to improve before even asking the question. A single site where I can ask and get answers that cover either or both is great.

Obviously for my actual example, all of that would be allowed on Bicycles.SE. But what about another sport?

For many athletic activities, there's an interlocking overlap between improving your overall fitness, specific fitness targets, equipment, food, hydration, rules, conventions and history.