Just like with any other activity that a person takes part in, they aim to do well in to imrpove their self-worth and demonstrate their strengths to others, to be recognized. Being acknowledged by one's fellow peers (as your case would be with your whole depression the dog statement over women a month ago demonstrates), whther for skills, sociableness, or any other trait deemed positive is sought after and cultivated by pretty much everyone. In this line of thought, why should smash be any different?
Like chess, military strategy, and, as you say, "deeper" fighters, smash is basically a medium for the combat staged between 2+ (the number, not the age) minds. There are many variables to be taken into account (opponent experience, your own experience, etc), reactions to read, and impossible to control outside factos (crowds, etc) to take stock of when playing.
Obviously, we both appear to be heavily biased in our stances toward smash, which is all well and good, but I don't intend to sway your opinon here by making this post. No, I aim to let you know that smash is not "just a children's game." That phrase is sickening due to it's infinite falseness, and it's doubly shocking to read the statement coming from one of NC's players that actually made the PRs.
A note of caution as well to end this wall for you Foxy: I know intelligence (partly by my own, but mostly by close association), and you should beware the overbearing scrutiny that accompanies it. Try to take joy in your accomplishments instead of trivializing them, while you simultaneously should acknowledge your faults and accept them rather than demoralize the values of others (even if only to yourself). I believe I am comfortable in saying that, while you and I both know the effects of intelligence are only positive now, I'm not so sure both of us know what may happen to those feeling superior in the near future.
I hope you take something away from this Foxy, really I do.
I'm off tomorrow.
