Hot answers tagged

9

I vote yes to the change. Imagine "Bill" turns up and asks "How many points does a soccer team get for a win?" Do we care if Bill plays football or just watches it? I don't. Take each question on its own merit, in my opinion. If it is applicable to a wider audience then it's fair game. We have had a few questions on Formula 1 - I don't think anybody ...


6

No. Chess is not a sport for the purposes of this site. This was established pretty decisively on this meta question. Chess is a board game. And as such questions about it belong on Board & Card Games. Chess Boxing is on topic though the chess side of it is should be asked on B&CG rather than here because we don't have chess experts here. The ...


5

Our scope is sports. Pretty much every aspect, from participation to fandom is on topic. Things that are related to sports, but might be on topic elsewhere (like fitness, or outdoors) are mostly on topic here unless they are squarely in the camp of those sites. General fitness is off topic, but running is on topic. General Outdoors question are off topic, ...


5

I've spent a little time the past two days researching possible answers to both questions and I think that the answer here has to do with answer-ability. https://sports.stackexchange.com/questions/2417/what-is-the-lowest-bowling-score-under-a-recorded-average#question is incredibly hard to answer, if not outright impossible. I went through tens of websites ...


4

The whole concept of Stack Excahnge (or at least how I perceive it) is that it is all aimed to help the whole community - regardless of a persons status. If a person is interested in finding out more information on a given subject then they can head to the appropriate site. If you try to prevent people asking questions if they are not directly involved in ...


4

A very good question for which, am sure, there will be a difference of opinion. I have to agree with @Bogdanovist on his opinion of subjectivity. Taking cricket as an example, if I had to post a question today which falls completely in the "non-speculative" region, then the only questions I can ask are about the rules, statistics or history. These questions ...


3

Good meta question! You are definitely not the first person to point out to the scope/subjectivity dilemma, and will most likely not the last person either. See the following questions/answers, in which I personally took this up (there are others who argued for/against this very concept): Speculative questions on Sports.SE https://sports.meta....


3

I skipped that close review post, because I was having second thoughts, only to realize this meta post afterwards. What strikes me is that people find the question too broad, but fail to edit the question. I thought the request itself was pretty clear, but with too much text. I reviewed the question (edited) and in this state, I find the question Sports ...


3

If the dance is danced competitively such as in Ball Room Dancing competitions, then it's definitely on topic. If it's not then no.


3

You can name it a fandom question, but even if the question will be about the statistical aspect of the curse, essentially, it will be looking for: Which games Mick Jagger has attended Which team Mick Jagger was supporting in these particular games? And these 2 questions don't really lie within our scope. I think it's off-topic.


2

I think those that decide to write blog posts should pick topics they are knowledgeable about and provide posts that are interesting to your average sports fan. We probably should write about things happening in sports that are notable because they're a record or a rare occurrence or because the writer can provide some unique insight. I think we should ...


2

I am a bit torn on this, I don't think having the rules of the game for many disciplines, is a meaningful investment of time. Writing about famous sports events is also tricky, as any reference to facts (numbers, reports, images etc) will have to come from the press, which will certainly have a blog-like article to go with it. So far I can see two major ...


2

These questions are interesting. I didn't know what the Gagarin Cup is (I could have made reasonable guesses, and they were close in this case) but now I do. These questions are niche. The fact that it takes more than viewing the first page of Google is not a reasonable argument against them; in fact, it's a good reason to have them on Stack Exchange. ...


2

My take: Personally, I'm not too interested in these trivia style questions. However, there is clearly an interest in them from our community of users. Stack Exchange communities do in general have a fairly large amount of discretion in order to define what is "on topic" for their community, even if the same sort of question would be off-topic on a "typical"...


2

My view would be that this kind of question would still be off-topic. I personally think that the use of data science to improve performance in fantasy sports leagues is an interesting subject - but that doesn't mean it is on-topic here, as the community had a pretty strong consensus that fantasy sports are off-topic. While it's true that there isn't a ...


1

Seems to me, like you said, this it too broad. Not only that, but there are probably official channels that should be referenced when learning "how-to" that are maintained by governing bodies and I'd rather not be handing out advice or answers that could become outdated when the official "how-to" changes.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible