3

Related to, but I think reasonably distinct from, Is martial arts history on topic?: are questions about specific martial arts matches on-topic?

For example, an SE about chess might reasonably allow a question 'in Kasparov vs Portisch, 1983, why did Kasparov make [x] move?'.

Would questions like 'Why did Muhammad Ali use [x] tactic in his 1974 match with George Foreman?' be on topic? Or would this belong more on the sports site?

2

I would argue that it should be on topic. Discussing a fight in a combat sport in that level of specificity would be no different than asking "Why in the second 1864 game between Shusaku and Gennan Inseki did Gennan Inseki's ears turn red on move 127?"

In truth, asking on a "sports" wiki would not get you nearly the depth of experience or interesting answers that you would get here.

I don't consider a distinction between "martial arts" and "combat sports" to be a highly relevant one, since the line between them is fairly blurred, and I don't buy the idea that "it only counts if it isn't being done in front of an audience."

  • Well, that would be my stance, and since there doesn't seem to be much disagreement, I'll call that quorum. – RSid Feb 27 '12 at 20:27
1

I agree with David H. Clements's answer as for on topic questions. In addition, I would consider that questions of the type "Who would win a fight between X and Y" and "How could have X won the match they lost against Y" off topic.

  • 2
    Well I'd agree questions of the forms you mentioned would be too subjective to be useful, but what about asking for explanations of a technique or the rationale behind it in a specific match? I'd say a well-formed question that stuck to the actual events of a match and not hypotheticals would be on-topic. – RSid Feb 28 '12 at 15:35
  • @RSid: I would say those are on topic, just like David H. Clements said. – Sardathrion - against SE abuse Feb 28 '12 at 15:39

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .