This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/16/sports/competitive-bridge-is-not-a-sport-a-british-court-rules.html

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Competitive Bridge Is Not a Sport, a British Court Rules Competitive Bridge Is Not a Sport, a British Court Rules
(35 minutes later)
LONDON — Is competitive bridge — the four-player card game favored by the likes of Warren Buffett and Bill Gates — a sport? LONDON — Is competitive bridge — the four-player card game favored by the likes of Warren E. Buffett and Bill Gates — a sport?
No, a British court ruled on Thursday, dealing a blow to bridge players who had brought a lawsuit in an attempt to obtain official recognition and government financing to teach the game in schools and encourage students to take it up.No, a British court ruled on Thursday, dealing a blow to bridge players who had brought a lawsuit in an attempt to obtain official recognition and government financing to teach the game in schools and encourage students to take it up.
The English Bridge Union, which has 55,000 members, brought the suit after the English Sports Council said last year that it would not recognize so-called mind sports like bridge and chess.The English Bridge Union, which has 55,000 members, brought the suit after the English Sports Council said last year that it would not recognize so-called mind sports like bridge and chess.
Justice Ian Dove, ruling for the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, insisted that the issue was “not the broad, somewhat philosophical, question as to whether or not a bridge is a sport,” but on this narrower question: “whether or not the defendant lawfully adopted a definition of sport which effectively excludes ‘mind sports.’ ” Justice Ian Dove, ruling for the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, insisted that the issue was “not the broad, somewhat philosophical, question as to whether or not a bridge is a sport,” but rather this narrower question: “whether or not the defendant lawfully adopted a definition of sport which effectively excludes ‘mind sports.’ ”
Other countries — among them Belgium, France, Ireland, the Netherlands and Poland — recognize competitive bridge as a sport. The International Olympic Committee recognized bridge and chess as sports in the 1990s, although neither has yet been played at the Olympics. (The World Bridge Federation, and its United States affiliate, are trying to change that.)Other countries — among them Belgium, France, Ireland, the Netherlands and Poland — recognize competitive bridge as a sport. The International Olympic Committee recognized bridge and chess as sports in the 1990s, although neither has yet been played at the Olympics. (The World Bridge Federation, and its United States affiliate, are trying to change that.)
The issue was not merely symbolic: The sports council, and its parent and sibling organizations in Britain, distributes funds from the National Lottery for all kinds of projects, from Olympic-level facilities to youth leagues, and sporting competitions are eligible for certain tax exemptions.The issue was not merely symbolic: The sports council, and its parent and sibling organizations in Britain, distributes funds from the National Lottery for all kinds of projects, from Olympic-level facilities to youth leagues, and sporting competitions are eligible for certain tax exemptions.
“The importance of supporting physical training and physical recreation remains a significant element of public policy,” Justice Dove wrote in his ruling, though he added: “That is not to say that there may not be good reason for public policy to promote mental activity and agility.”“The importance of supporting physical training and physical recreation remains a significant element of public policy,” Justice Dove wrote in his ruling, though he added: “That is not to say that there may not be good reason for public policy to promote mental activity and agility.”
Phil Smith, the director of sports at the council, which is also known as Sport England, praised the ruling.Phil Smith, the director of sports at the council, which is also known as Sport England, praised the ruling.
“Sport England’s job is to help the nation to be more physically active, a role given to us by our royal charter,” he said in a statement. “We recognize that many people enjoy playing bridge, but that’s not going to play a part in the fight against inactivity.”“Sport England’s job is to help the nation to be more physically active, a role given to us by our royal charter,” he said in a statement. “We recognize that many people enjoy playing bridge, but that’s not going to play a part in the fight against inactivity.”
Ian Payn, vice chairman of the English Bridge Union, said he was “very disappointed” by the ruling. He said the case was never about money.Ian Payn, vice chairman of the English Bridge Union, said he was “very disappointed” by the ruling. He said the case was never about money.
“There’s a lot of calumny going around claiming it’s an attempt to get funding from Sport England,” he said. “Nothing could be further from our minds.”“There’s a lot of calumny going around claiming it’s an attempt to get funding from Sport England,” he said. “Nothing could be further from our minds.”
The bridge union believes that recognition would not only provide intangible benefits, but would also make it easier for schools to add bridge to their curriculums and for local bridge clubs to get space for tournaments. (Justice Dove said the “nonpecuniary” benefits of recognition “cannot be dismissed out of hand.”)The bridge union believes that recognition would not only provide intangible benefits, but would also make it easier for schools to add bridge to their curriculums and for local bridge clubs to get space for tournaments. (Justice Dove said the “nonpecuniary” benefits of recognition “cannot be dismissed out of hand.”)
Mr. Payn said the organization might appeal. Justice Dove did not specifically grant permission to appeal, which would ease the process to contest the ruling but does not rule out the possibility.Mr. Payn said the organization might appeal. Justice Dove did not specifically grant permission to appeal, which would ease the process to contest the ruling but does not rule out the possibility.
He noted that the bridge union had already spent 100,000 pounds, about $153,000, in litigation expenses and has also been ordered to pay at least £50,000 to cover the English Sports Council’s litigation costs. He noted that the bridge union had already spent 100,000 pounds, about $153,000, in litigation expenses and had also been ordered to pay at least £50,000 to cover the English Sports Council’s litigation costs.
“Whether we think that something so chimeric as recognition is worth the expense of possibly losing the appeal, as well, is the decision we have to face,” Mr. Payn said.“Whether we think that something so chimeric as recognition is worth the expense of possibly losing the appeal, as well, is the decision we have to face,” Mr. Payn said.
Meanwhile, the bridge union will carry on. Mr. Payn noted that the English team “narrowly missed” the bronze level — losing out to Poland — at this year’s World Bridge Teams Championships, which were held in Chennai, India, and ended on Saturday.Meanwhile, the bridge union will carry on. Mr. Payn noted that the English team “narrowly missed” the bronze level — losing out to Poland — at this year’s World Bridge Teams Championships, which were held in Chennai, India, and ended on Saturday.