The Instigator
Pro (for)
8 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
7 Points

Is golf a real sport?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/21/2014 Category: Sports
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 657 times Debate No: 44374
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (2)
Votes (3)




Golf is a real sport because it requires physical activity. Also it is considered a real sport by ever national sporting organization in the world including the Olympics.


I accept this debate. Best of luck to Pro, and Pro may make the first argument.
Debate Round No. 1


Good luck to you too Con!

I would like to start off by defining a term

Sport as anything that requires anything physically in one of the following areas: Agility, stamina, strength, or speed.

Now Golf does in fact require A LOT of physical exertion. In a typical 18 hole game one can accumulate up to 10,000 steps according to CNN! Also while swinging many different muscle groups are constantly being trained anywhere from 1-3 hours according to CNN. This may not involve speed but endurance and stamina is actually quite necessary! An average 18 hole golf course can range anywhere from 1. 5 miles to 2.5 miles. Also, one must lug a golf bag of up to 200 lbs if they do not have a golf cart which are not used in daily practice. Agility and Stamina is actually what golf is all about. My opponents have provided no factual evidence behind their points and they were refuted using factual evidence and reasoning. This proves all of my opponents points as invalid. My opponents clearly do not understand what golf is and what it takes.

P1: Golf requires physical stamina and is thereby a sport

Imagine having to walk anywhere from 1.5 to 2.5 miles with anywhere from a 20-200 lb bag on your back. Add on swinging a club using almost all of your different muscle groups over 60 times in a round. This requires a lot of physical stamina and there is no doubt about it. According to the NCAA 1 average round of golf requires more physical activity than 3 rounds of average volleyball and 4 laps of swimming combined so how can you say that golf is not a true sport? It requires more physical exertion and stamina than two of the other sports combined!


First, golf better matches the definition of a game than a sport. Merriam-Webster defines a game as an "activity engaged in for diversion or amusement." says a game is "an amusement or pastime; a competitive activity involving skill, chance, or endurance on the part of two or more persons who play according to a set of rules, usually for their own amusement or for that of spectators." Golf clearly matches these definitions thoroughly.

Second, unlike a sport, golf is not a rigorous physical activity. Burning 360 calories per hour playing golf without a cart or caddie is far less than the number of calories burned per hour in competitive sports: 900 in soccer, and 727 in football, basketball, and tennis. This defeats Pro's first contention. In addition, physical stamina does not constitute a sport. For example, as an opposing example, a gym workout can require much more stamina than any sport, yet still not qualify as one.

Lastly, golfers are not athletes. Professional golfers are sometimes overweight, old, or out of shape, and their caddies carry the equipment for them. There is no running, jumping, or cardiovascular activity in golf. If an activity does not make you break a sweat, or if it can be done while drinking and smoking, then it is not a sport.

The spotlight is now on Pro.
Debate Round No. 2
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Blackhawk42 4 years ago
On to Con's side and their arguments and my critiquing. Overall, I think Con made better arguments. I did like how you brought up the calorie consumption of sports. However, stating that golfers are not athletes since they can drink and smoke while golfing simply isn't good enough. Adding some analysis or research that proves that if you're drinking and smoking, you aren't under any physical exertion would be very important to linking that to your argument.
Posted by Blackhawk42 4 years ago
Now I haven't been active on this site very long, and won't be able to cast a vote. However, that doesn't stop me from giving constructive criticism.

First, I'd like to start with Pro. One major error I noticed (actually I noticed in both) is the lack of proper sourcing. When you cite a source in a debate, you are obliged to add a link or some quick way for all of us spectators to see and verify your sources. Another area of suspicion was the fact that in the first real speech of the entire round, Pro brings up the fact that Con had not posted any evidence against Pro's claims. This implies that this speech was STOLEN. Being a high school debater, stealing speeches is a very, very serious crime. If a person on a school's team is caught stealing a file, the entire school could be kicked out of the tournament. Once they find the person who stole the file, two things happen. First, they wipe the hard drive of the person's computer, and they then proceed to kick that person out of all debate (that means never is that person ever allowed to debate again). Moral of the story? Don't steal speeches.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by PiercedPanda 4 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:32 
Reasons for voting decision: I think pro had better arguments. Con showed many facts backed up by no proof what so ever.
Vote Placed by Anakin 4 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: All the excretion the golfers are using when walking, carrying clubs etc are not competitive. Who is carrying the clubs the best or who is walking faster does not affect the game so all those points are irrelevant. Hitting the ball and doing it actually does but not enough in my opinion. Do we count the calories it takes for a football player to get dressed? no because it does not affect the game so who cares...
Vote Placed by ruiran0326 4 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:52 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro simply reused an argument from a previous debate of his and did not edit it to fit the situation, so conduct goes to Con; however, sources and arguments go to Pro.