WHAT IS A SPORTS WATCH?

This is my only luxury watch I would use for actual sports. And because of this it gets a lot of wear. Basically any inbetweeny day (which is often as I like to jog.)

My idea of a sports watch pretty much tallies with yours. It has to be robust. It has to have proper WR and above all it has to be affordable. Honestly, I think the G-Shock fits the bill in every regard.

Great post @Fieldwalker! Isn’t the issue that, with the abundance of smartwatches, the majority of people are not going to spend any kind of significant 💰 on a watch that they would subject to any rough treatment?

You are plainly super-fit (though maybe not in the style of Connor McGregor?!) and you are also someone who is prepared to submerge a Spring Drive in a stream. Dare I say it, that’s a niche market! For you they built the Archimede Outdoor Protect:

Yours for €980 (+/- sales tax/duty). But you don’t see many of those out and about. There’s a reason for that, and the watch companies know it. Hence we arrive at the “sports chic” concept!

great post, i think the sport watch category also depends on which era that watch was born (jlc reverso for polo, patek phillipe, etc). but for now i think the proper sportwatch is a tough smartwatch with some hr monitoring feature, gps, etc like garmin, some type of g shock

sports watch is a watch that is made for certain sports. Daytona is made for racing on cars, so it’s not going to be exposed to a lot of elements. Reverso is made for polo, a sport where people were wearing sports coats as a uniform which now is considered a formal wear. Again, not a lot of water on a polo field.

Submariner is made for divers, so it should have good WR and robust case construction, while GMT-Master is made for pilots and won’t be submerged into any liquid on a daily basis (except for champagne because pilots are cool).

Of course design and appearance matter. Converse chucks were basketball shoes, and now it’s a fashion item form the grunge era. Nike Jordan’s are basketball shoes and huge fashion item. So Submariner is made for diving, but now it’s a statement piece and an elegant timeless accessory.

Royal Oak and Nautilus were created as a luxury items from the start. So in my book it doesn’t count as a sports watch.

Would I wear a Daytona for kayaking? Hell no. Would I wear it for racing? Hell yeah, it’s made for it. The same goes with a Reverso - not an option to go swimming, but a great option for playing polo.

You don’t wear soccer shoes while hiking.

My definition of a sport watch is something that you mentioned above and above all else that you wouldn’t mind getting banged up, scratched and worse loose like sinking in lake somewhere or falling of a cliff …. That’s my true def. Of a sports watch 🍻💪…

My understanding is a "Sports Watch" is whatever the person describing a particular watch wants it to be. It's a nebulous category to cover everything not already covered by something more specific.

Also, it would be a getting a bit too specific to have a category called "I have a massive amount of wealth, and want a status symbol for lounging at a bar or beside the pool".

I'd say Gshock are the best sports watches.

In my personal taxonomy of watches the Sport Watch is a super-category of robust, water-resistant, fully lumed, three handed watches that originated with the Rolex Oyster Perpetual. Sub-families include Field Watches, Expedition Watches and (maybe) Instrument Watches.

The other two primary super-categories in my horological head-canon are Dress Watches (Calatrava-style, Tank-style, Minimalist, etc.) and Tool Watches (Dive, Chrono, GMT, etc.).

None of this is hard and fast. Should Pilot Watches, for instance, be a super-category or a sub-category of both Sport and Tool? Where do marine and railroad watches belong? And what about Scarecrow's brain!?

I always thought that it referred to "sports" as in "pastime/informal" when it to watches, and had nothing to do with physical exercise, similar to a "sports coat".

https://youtu.be/jLo7tHDHgOc

This is what I think of when I hear the term "sports watch." 😎

My wrists swell too much; no watch is my sports watch! Though my Casio Duro is my beach watch, which fits the sports watch parameters.

I was going to post here something about people wearing a sport watch while not doing anything remotely connected to sport, but then I noticed the shoes that I was wearing despite having zero interest in participating in a marathon or triathlon, and my sunglasses that might look the part in a fighter's cockpit but I never been in a plane with less than 100 seats and always as a passenger. So I think that this time I'll give it a pass.

For me it's a watch that isn't a diver, flight, field, or dress watch. There are utility watches such as G-Shocks, along with other beater watches, but I don't class these as sports watches. Here are a few of my own

WWJHD?

What Would Jason Heaton Do?

If Jason Heaton would hold back from using it in an activity it appears to be suited to, it may be sporty—but it’s not a sports watch.

I absolutely love this jacket, wow.

I would 100% wear it with a Reverso. True sport look!

Other than that 360 flip looking super icey in the explorer lol

The idea was that the concept of "sport" is fluid. The leather on the pocket flap was so that you could repeatedly reach into your pocket for a shotgun cartridge without wearing out the fabric. Shooting was (and is) sport. Sport jackets have a different cut than evening jackets to allow greater flexibility. We now see them as formal. They were not 100 years ago.

If clothes change, why should we expect less from watches. The Reverso is apt. It is the original sports watch. The definition of sports watch has moved considerably since then. Who plays tennis wearing a Santos?

I'm crazy late to this thread (see 2 infant kids in previous posts) but I agree with your thoughts. I typically think of a "sports" watch as something with durable build, somewhat shock resistant, mostly brushed finishing so scratches won't be as visible, some type of lume, and some type of water resistance.

I am really fond of the GS Evolution 9 collection in GS's proprietary Ti which is lightweight and akin to Grade 5 in terms of wear resistance.

Also agree with @Aurelian in that it's a fluid term that spans a range of activities. Polo in a Rerverso? Out of my league but sure. Tennis in a Santos? I guess you could, but prob shouldn't. Hiking, swimming with kids, then to a nice dinner jacket in a SMP 300m diver... absolutely.

At higher and higher prices you're getting into the G Wagon and Range Rover weeds of "built for" vs what they're actually used for. Most of us nerds here define sports watches differently that the masses who actually buy "sports" watches which is just for the aesthetic look of something nice.

Right? Right? Pilots are cool, you know it, I know it) That's why you have a screw down crown on a GMT-Master II. True tool watch ya know)))

Yeah, in our time we don't need watches to track time, we have computers. We can't argue that a while ago watches were an actual tools, but today, just like Converse Chucks - 'Sports watches' are about appearance. Like dress watches are made with a specific construction and design choices - thin, simple, understated in almost snoby way. And sports watches are usually big, bit chunky and have product design that made around some function (reversible case, chronograph, rotating bezel, etc.)

Now, nobody is telling that you can't wear your Cartier Tank casually. I have a Tank homage and I wear it with jeans and denim overshirts. I wouldn't wear a submariner with a suit (but would easily wear it with a sport jacket), but it's just me.

I think on a surface level - technical definition (made for certain sports) is correct. Like chess timer is a sports watch, since it's made to time chess matches and chess is indeed a sport. But on a deeper level, at least from my perspective, it isn't about the watches, it's about people.

Can you dive with a Submariner or Sea-dweller? Yes, those watches are capable of doing this, but how many people would actually do this? The former tools became a current status symbols. Oyster case defined the look of a tool watch - now it resembles flex. Some watches that have this industrial/tool form are not made to fulfil corresponding function, but share a lot of visual traits, in fact enough that we recognise those watches as sports watches. All this partly because we have way more efficient tools to do those jobs and partly because brands are making money on 'luxury' status of their products. Like those fancy steakhouses from this Turkish chef Salt Bae. People are paying big premiums for this experience, while food is continuously reported as very very mediocre. And to be fair, I just don't get it.

For me, Rolex is a tool watch company. I love their products. But I hate term sport chic regarding anything.) Now, I'm not crazy and I wouldn't go diving with a Reverso because 'it's made for sports'. But I only see one reason why I should put a Submariner on a pedestal, wear it for special occasions and be afraid of scratch it - because I can't afford it. I like using my stuff, I like playing, recording and experimenting with an expensive guitars and handmade pedals. And I like wearing my watches, I don't mind swimming with a leather band, I'm wearing suede boots on rainy days because I have shoe care products and I'm not afraid of patina at the end. For me - this is the only right way. I work hard for my money, I want to enjoy things I've bought.

So yeah, it's kinda about form this days and because this 'tool watch' aesthetic is almost exclusively on vogue this days (which is a complete shame, may I add) we're here discussing this whole situation.) For me personally, modern Rolex just doesn't cut it. I can't stand behind their current philosophy. If I ever can afford a Rolex I'm 100% going for the vintage one. I'm not gonna put it through extreme conditions and use it as a hammer, but at least this watch isn't gonna create a dissonance in my head. It's gonna be already beaten up, maybe it will have some patina and that's how I like my stuff. I'm that dude who found the guide on YouTube on how to create a patina on a leather phone case and followed the steps (results were mediocre at absolute best)

On the other hand we have a Breitling Emergency which literally saved lives of those who used it. We have G-Shocks. Or Fortis who tested their movements in a stratosphere. Those watches also share same 'tool' aesthetic, but are way more capable. And you can buy a metal casioak if you want, or modify your rubber one with a case kit so your G-Shock will also look the part.

Yeah, 100 years ago this was a jersey. Times have changed.

Still, I don't see any problem wearing Santos while playing tennis. The same goes with a sport cars - you can take your BMW M series on a track or to the autobahn to get advantaged of a power under the hood, or you can slowly ride around the fancy part of the town and use the car as a background for your instagram photos. Car is capable of going fast, it has features that was designed for going fast. People say it's a sports car. Vintage Mustang or Porsche? You might not take your shiny restored car to the track, but this sport DNA is still there

The fact that our perception of something is changed doesn't mean that the thing itself changed. Sport jacket is still more practical and comfortable than a suit jacket or tuxedo. You can still wear a Reverso with a casual polo shirt. You still got a sport heritage in this things.

That fact that we moved on from diving with Submariners to posing for instagram doesn't change the history. It's up to you, if you want to take a luxury watch under water or on the tennis court. If it is made for sports, its a sports watch. It might be obsolete, since we're not usually buying those watches to use as a tools, but it is still there if you need it. I don't see a problem in using watch the way it was intended. I don't play polo and i have zero clue how do you even get on the horse, so it narrows down my possible wearing scenarios for Reverso, but if you want to take it on a field, I would not say you shouldn't.

I understand that the concept of the sport is fluid, and there are different sports out there, not only physical activities. Poker tournaments or chess tournaments are technically sport contests and you likely would never ever have your watch damaged while participating in those.

So the idea that sports watch should always be a rugged piece of metal with a strong resistance to the elements isn't quite speak to me. I think it's about a design. Reverso was made this way intentionally. Sports jacket also was made this way intentionally.

In my opinion, a sports watch is a watch with useful features for sports applications. To me this means a stopwatch feature.

I am really fond of the GS Evolution 9 collection in GS's proprietary Ti which is lightweight and akin to Grade 5 in terms of wear resistance.

Yeah 100% - I've been trying to gradually have more and more Ti in my selection and a ti GS diver is probably next.

G Wagon and Range Rover weeds of "built for" vs what they're actually used for

A garage that my bike team rents for training at is in a snooty area of town - no house in that neighbourhood under 10 million. We drive past an endless parade of Maybachs, Benteygas, Culinans, some custom G-wagons and one Urus. I'll hazard a guess that even if they are capable off road vehicle they seldom see a dirt road. 😉

BTW - having 2 infant kids is it's own serious sport. Keep up the good fight my friend!

Sorry - long answer.

I get that many years ago, and historically, a chrono watch had use in sports. But I don't get why it's still considered important.

I can only speak for myself - I do lots of sports that are timed events - and have never used an analogue chrono for any of them, ever. Serious training and racing need a Garmin (or similar) to provide splits, pace per KM, HR, last lap, cadence, power, etc... All races take official times so I only record data for myself and pacing/ training data. Less serious daily life activities, well, they don't need to be timed! 🙂

One more concern for me, chronos generally have reduced WR, which is generally accepted as a good thing for a sports watch. I think some of them have better WR via screw pushers... but again, those are more likely to get left open by mistake, and likely to be screwed down and not ready when you need them.

This is the routine for myself and the athletes I train with, in the variety of sports I participate in. But we're all different, and if you use a chrono watch for sports and activities then power to you my friend. 👍

Such a good post. You are right on every point.

Daytona and reverso as sports watch? Sure, if im earning an accredited investor wage but even so, i wouldn’t be THAT financially irresponsible

Heres my premium sport watch that have used for various activities and sports that require timing. Have no worries ruining this watch, cus i basically earned it for “free”, so im blessed in that aspect, i guess

The Pelagos is exactly what a great sports watch should be 🎯, I'm glad most of us are equally baffled at the Daytona for sports idea. 🍻

A sports watch is a watch you wear for watching sports on telly.

I don’t own a Smart Watch. Run or Bike or Lawn work- Casio / Timex all Day long ! Beach 🏖/ pool -!Seiko / Vostok/ Bulova/ Orient/ Citizen / Casio ! All Look Fantastic ! All Not A Cost 💲 Of A Car !! Beep Beep! Thanks for the thoughts. Eric