I guess 'fun' may have been a bad choice of words.

I was merly trying to point out that I beleive there is a difference between a 'normal' game and a 'tournament' game.

For example, I know how to play chess, but am terrible at it. I would never consider playing in a masters chess tournament, as I would be totally outmatched, and I would not have a prayer in any games. I do would not consider that being 'fun'. My personal beleif is that I would not play in any tournament where I didn't have at least a chance to do well. The ultimate reason to play in a tournament is to win. Hopefully the challenge is difficult, as that makes the victories that much sweeter.

On the other hand, I can play a 'regular' game, even one I am not very good at, and one where I have no chance at all to win, and still have fun. It is a learning experience, without the pressure, or even the desire to win.

A regular game can be played with fun as the motivation, but a tournament game should be played with winning as the ultimate motivation, IMO. (but fun can also be a secondary motivation and byproduct)

In short.... A standard game has fun as a motivation, and a tournament game has fun as a byproduct.