The Instigator
ConservativePolitico
Pro (for)
Losing
4 Points
The Contender
RedMoonlight
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Umbrellas Are Overall Better Than Raincoats

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 4 votes the winner is...
RedMoonlight
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/1/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 8,577 times Debate No: 35208
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (10)
Votes (4)

 

ConservativePolitico

Pro

First round is for acceptance.

I will be arguing that umbrellas are better than raincoats. We will be using both of these items intended purpose for the debate i.e. keeping one dry in the rain.

3 rounds
1 week to vote
5k characters

Good luck!
RedMoonlight

Con

I accept your terms, and good luck to you.
Debate Round No. 1
ConservativePolitico

Pro

I will be touching on three key areas in this debate to bring my main argument to bear: affordability, dryness and ease of use to show that umbrellas are better than raincoats.

Affordability

First off, umbrellas are on average much cheaper than raincoats. A solid umbrella will run you $20-30 while a good quality raincoat will run you $75-100. [1] [2]

This is completely unnecessary, especially since umbrellas keep you more dry than raincoats (as I will demonstrate). Why pay so much money for something just to keep you dry from the rain? Umbrellas are much more cheap and therefore more desirable when looking at it from a financial standpoint.

Point One for umbrellas.

Dryness

Umbrellas keep you more dry than raincoats. An umbrella with a good diameter will have the rain run around you in a good sized sphere of dryness that keeps the rain out completely. The umbrella moves with you and no water gets through or around it.

A raincoat has water merely run off of you and straight onto your pants. If you're wearing jeans or a long shirt, the water will run off of your sleeves and the bottom of the coat and straight onto your unprotected clothing. Instead of running around you like an umbrella, the water runs down you and into your shoes. It's really quite miserable.

Point Two for umbrellas.

Ease of Use

Umbrellas are easy, you put them up when its raining, you take them down when its not. You can slide them easily into a backpack, bag or purse with little hassle. You can carry them inside and put them under your desk at school or work. They store easily in your car.

Raincoats are not so easy. You have to put them on, sometimes over cumbersome clothes or bags. You also have to take them off and hang them up. You can't easily carry a raincoat around with you in a mall or school or anything. There's no easy way to store a big wet plastic coat.

Point Three for umbrellas.

As we can see, short simple and to the point, umbrellas are much better than raincoats overall.

Thank you.

[1] https://www.google.com...

[2] https://www.google.com...
RedMoonlight

Con

Before I proceed with the bulk of my statement, I'd like to point out that two out of three parts of Pro's argument were inconsistent with his terms for the debate.

Pro states in round one:

"We will be using both of these items intended purpose for the debate i.e. keeping one dry in the rain."

In violation of this, Pro's first and third arguments, while being factors to take into account when making a decision, were not arguments relating to how well an umbrella keeps one dry, a standard which pro confined the debate to in his terms.

However, since Pro has now subconsciously influenced the stance of potential voters with these additional arguments, I feel it is necessary for me to negate them.

Let's begin.

AFFORDABILITY

Pro declares that umbrellas are preferable to raincoats on the grounds that an umbrella of a given quality is cheaper than a raincoat of the same quality while at the same time keeping one more dry.
The assertion that an umbrella keeps you more dry is false, as I will prove soon enough, which is one detriment to going for this option. However, from the purely financial standpoint that pro speaks of afterward, the umbrella is also inferior, for one key reason; cost effectiveness. Compared to a sturdy raincoat, umbrellas are delicate. They COMMONLY break [3][4]. Good quality or not, they are made of much thinner material and are more prone to tearing. The flexibility of umbrellas causes them to lose shape simply from use [1]. This likelihood is increased by the fact that umbrellas, held out above your head,are more exposed to damaging elements like tree branches and wind. Pro questions the reasoning of paying so much just to ensure dryness? While a frequently-used umbrella may last a year, a well used raincoat could last you five or more. Therefore, while it is true that raincoats are pricier, they are far more cost effective, and save you money in the long run.

Point one for umbrellas has been refuted :D

Now onto the meat of the debate.

DRYNESS

Pro claims that an umbrella's diameter prevents water from running down onto your pants, as supposedly occurs when wearing a raincoat. However, most raincoats do have a diameter larger than your average shirt or jacket, which, as anyone who has ever worn one would know, is slightly wider than one's pants. Enough at least, for the dripping water to miss.

One huge drawback of umbrellas which Pro did not address is their failure to block rain coming from an angle. When it rains, other than light sprinkles, you generally are in some degree of a storm. In storms, you almost always face wind. Sometimes strong wind. The wind is usually strong enough that umbrella users experience a frustrating problem. When wind blows rain at you from an angle, it drives it underneath the umbrella [2]. Hence, your head is the only place actually protected in Pro's supposed "sphere of dryness". Even worse, in moderate to strong wind, you will inevitably tilt your umbrella back a certain degree. The result is wet pants and a half wet shirt. Putting on your generally hooded raincoat however, will guarantee you complete cover from your head down to your knees, far more than a floppy umbrella has to offer.

Point two for raincoats.

EASE OF USE

Ease of use rivals even dryness as the area where the umbrella fails most severely. The first and most obvious reason for this is that you must HOLD an umbrella. A raincoat is a hands-free device, clearly preferable to tiring out your arm, constantly supporting your umbrella. This one-hand deal also prevents you from carrying much of a load, a must for many people. Plus, what about those of us who travel by bike? I can speak from experience that trying to hold up an umbrella on a bike, even in a non windy situation, while doable, is very very inconvenient. None of these issues exist with your trusty raincoat.

Pro claims umbrellas are easy to slide into a bag/purse. Hardly the case. While obviously smaller than when open, closed up umbrellas are still quite large, often too large to fit in most mobile bags. While bulky, I would bet on fitting a rolled/ folded raincoat into my bag over an umbrella any day. Some are actually quite compact [5]. They are also very easily shaken off.

Point number three for the raincoat.

I have dismantled each and every one of Pro's points on why umbrellas are better overall than raincoats and given additional points on why raincoats are the superior choice. Thank you Pro, and thank you readers.

SOURCES:
[1] http://www.chacha.com...
[2] http://www.ehow.com...
[3] http://answers.yahoo.com...
[4] http://answers.yahoo.com...
[5] http://shop.totes-isotoner.com...
Debate Round No. 2
ConservativePolitico

Pro

To clarify...

When I said we would be debating on how well the items keep you dry, I meant that we would not be saying things like "An umbrella can be used as a boat" or "A raincoat can be used to keep your bike dry". We were debating the intended purpose of these items only, not that we were only debating the dryness of the two. I apologize if that was not clear. This was merely put into the first round to discourage jokesters and trolls from derailing the debate.

Affordability

My opponent claims raincoats are more cost effective. But is that really true? They claim a good umbrella can last a year while a good raincoat can last five. However, a good raincoat can cost you over $120 while a good umbrella can be purchased for $20. If a $20 umbrella lasts a year, and you buy one every year for five years you're still spending less than you would on a "sturdy" raincoat.

My opponent also claims that umbrellas are less durable. Sure, this is true but if you are careful with your umbrella, like anything, if you take care of it, it will last. Umbrellas are different from raincoats in that they're lighter, easier to handle and easier to keep with you than raincoats and therefore are a little less durable. But the trade off is clearly worth it given how unruly raincoats can be.

I am skeptical about how a raincoat really saves you money in the long run. And, how often are raincoats and umbrellas truly used? In most cases (say a light rain) people are content running to their cars or just bearing the rain rather than deal with an umbrella or raincoat. Is it not better to just buy a decent umbrella for $20 for the amount of use rather than invest a lot of money into something that might not even get consistent use?

Dryness

My opponent believes that a raincoat has enough bulk to shield you from running water. This simply isn't true. Since the water is literally on you, movement will send the water spilling onto your shoes, hands, etc. Movement, since the water is on your body, will cause the water to move as well enlarging the potential for getting wet. Umbrellas do not have this problem. Another plus for umbrellas is that you can carry a purse, backpack or shopping bags with you. With a raincoat, unless you want to try and pull the coat over your backpack, you cannot protect anything being held in your hand. Even though an umbrella requires a hand to use, the other hand can carry a wide variety of items that will also be kept dry. Raincoats do not have this capability.

The point about the wind my opponent makes is a simple one to refute. Tilt your umbrella towards the wind. If the wind is coming at you from the front it is a matter of tilting the umbrella forward to maintain the same protection. It's actually quite efficient. You don't have this ability in a raincoat and if you're walking into the rain your unprotected face will be blasted with water regardless of a hood which goes over your head not your face.

Ease of Use

I covered the point about the arm in the previous section. Umbrellas allow you to carry items and keep them try while raincoats do not.

As you can see, this woman is able to drink coffee and talk on her phone. Neither of which would be possible if she was in a raincoat.

Also, umbrellas, when closed, are also easy to shake off and store. They fit conveniently in a car, backpack, purse, you can slide them under your desk at work or school quite easily.

These points, plus the fact that umbrellas are cheaper, dryer, easier to use and are more versatile in their ability to block wind and rain make them far superior to raincoats.

Thank you.
RedMoonlight

Con

AFFORDABILITY

Pro rebuts my point, insisting that the price disparity between umbrellas and raincoats is too great for a raincoat to be a truly cost effective option.
However, the prices my opponent cites are not reflective of the general costs of the two items. As you can see from this online store [1] the $20 umbrellas are on the cheap (and low quality) side of the market. The average prices are in the $30 to $50 range.
The same is true for his price quote on raincoats. Average raincoat prices are between $70 and $100 [2]. Buying the cheap $20 umbrellas that my opponent speaks of could result in the need for around ten of them to last as long as a hundred dollar raincoat, at double the cost.

My opponent believes that careful use of an umbrella will make up for its lack of durability. While taking care of it certainly plays a part, the fact remains that umbrellas are less durable, and more exposed than raincoats, leading to inevitable damage simply from use.
He concedes that umbrellas are more delicate, but states that this is compensated by other advantages like lower weight, ease of handling and ease of storage, which I will soon address and negate in the "ease of use" section.

Finally, Pro reasons that the cheaper choice is better due to how infrequently most people supposedly use these things. However, having lived in several different locations, I know that most places have a typical rainy season when rain occurs much more often than Pro makes it seem.
Experiencing this season for several months out of every year, it is no doubt worth it to make one enduring investment into a strong raincoat, rather than continue to be hassled every year buying new umbrellas and babying them to avoid damage, especially when the dryness they provide is still substandard.

DRYNESS

Pro disputes my claim that a raincoat is bulky enough for running water to miss one's pants/shoes.
It is apparent from this picture[3] that a raincoat does in fact offer enough bulk for water dripping off the sides to NOT come into contact with one's pants. While a few stray drops may fall in the right place to hit your shoes, or pants infrequently, an umbrella offers no greater protection due to the angled rain which I referenced in the previous round.
My opponent is correct that when wearing a raincoat, items you are carrying are left exposed. However, the same point about wind can be utilized here as well, since umbrellas allow for angled rain to be driven underneath the shield, hitting the items you have on your person. Therefore, the same issue often exists with umbrellas.
This, coupled with the fact that you have one less hand available, makes a raincoat the far preferable choice.

Pro's idea of tilting the umbrella does not protect you without some serious drawbacks. For example, the inconvenience of constantly having to peer around the umbrella to see where you're going, exposing your face every time. There is also the fact that tilting the umbrella does not offer one MORE dry area, but rather shifts the wall of protection from the face/head downward to the torso section.
Then there's the inconvenience of keeping in control of your umbrella against the wind when passing people and obstacles. In essence, while pointing your umbrella forward may appear to be a good idea, and helps slightly in some situations, in practice it is not worth the effort when you could exploit this exact protection from simply wearing a raincoat, which demands no effort at all.

My opponent's final points on dryness are falsified.

EASE OF USE

Pro alleges using a strap-on umbrella allows one to carry items in both hands while keeping these items dry. However, this assertion is not as clear-cut as the woman in the picture makes it seem. Bear in mind that Pro's only solution to the issue of wind-driven rain was tilting your umbrella, which obviously cannot be done when it is rigidly stuck to your bag.
Therefore, our lady friend's phone/drink would likely both have been soaked by the time she reached her destination, if she were in any of the vast majority of rain showers which include wind as a component. Had she removed her umbrella from her purse and held it conventionally to tilt it, the one-arm problem would re-emerge with all the tilting complications as well. She could endure all of this nuisance, while not keeping her items or clothes dry due to an umbrella's host of issues. Or, she could elect to keep the rest of her body dry with a raincoat, and simply hold her drink in a plastic cup and phone in a case.

Umbrellas are too large to fit in most bags, as is clear from Pro's picture.

I have again dismantled each of Pro's points and replaced them with my own. Thanks for the interesting debate.

[1] http://shopping.yahoo.com...
[2] http://shopping.yahoo.com...
[3] http://www.onestopplus.com...
Debate Round No. 3
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by TUF 3 years ago
TUF
No prob I was bored and had free time
Posted by RedMoonlight 3 years ago
RedMoonlight
Thanks for the great analysis and all the praise TUF.
Posted by TUF 3 years ago
TUF
rain has stopped. I actually think based on Con's arguments, that the rain coat would be easier to store in general, than the umbrella.

Also as Con stated, umbrellas can be big and awkward. Even with Pro's rebuttal concerning compact umbrellas (the lady in the picture), it's still easier to carry a raincoat (Ignoring the fact that compact umbrellas have to be held higher, which leads to more blood rush, or fatigue).

This was a really fun debate and I enjoyed reading it. This was a very good idea, and I give Pro props for thinking of it. This debate is also very relevant to my life right now, as I have been hashing out similar issues with a co-worker of mine. We often have to patrol in the rain, and I found using a rain coat was slightly easier in the harsh mood changing weather Utah constantly faces.

Great Job to both debaters, and I wish you luck for the remainder of the voting period!
Posted by TUF 3 years ago
TUF
ing the direction of your umbrella, while still inevitably being hit with rain. A Rain coat or a Trench coat means you don't have to focus on this so much, and protects the bulk of your body without as many loopholes in protecting the upper region.

I will give Pro the point about the pants though. Overall most rain coats will not be able to cover the lower region. To me that's never been as much of a problem because the material in most pants tends to dry a lot faster than in a lot of shirts.

Ease of use:

I can go both ways on this one too, though I would lean on Con again. This one is versatile because a lot of it depends on the situation the individual in question is in. In Pro's example, it would make more sense for the woman to have an Umbrella, because she might be able to enjoy coffee and talking on her cell phone easier. However it also means she is incapacitated because she has to hold several different items.

Con gets this on the point of holding items (as Pro originally argued in his round 2). Holding an umbrellas means you have to physically put effort into protecting yourself, whereas a rain coat just sits on your body. Realistically, holding an umbrella shouldn't be too hard, but in terms of addressing which is easier to use, you have to admit that a rain coat is naturally easier.

Also it doesn't favor people who may have injuries, older people who may have the in-ability to hold things up for an extended amount of time (keep in mind the potential to be fighting the wind; I myself have struggled to hold onto an umbrella on a windy day).

Again, while this point is context specific, overall Con's points seem to point to the umbrella being a tad more difficult that simply wearing a rain coat.

Finally I think Con wins this point from his argument about being easy to store. Again, both are relatively easy to store, but I agree that a coat is a little easier. You can fold it up and put it in a bag, or even wear it if it's too cold ou
Posted by TUF 3 years ago
TUF
And finally I will address the most important issue.

Convincing arguments- I have to give this one to Con, because overall I think he made the most logical and accurate points in this debate.

Affordability: Right from the get go, I noticed plenty of flaws in this line of reasoning. I think Con handled them well, and worded them probably even better than I did in my head. But his point remains: Why should we care about cost over quality? In personal relation to his statement that "umbrellas break easily", I can testify that this is true. Which, quite simply, is why I myself have stopped using them. While it's true that a raincoat can get ripped, or shrink, overall there tends to be a better luck streak. But as Con said, the flimsy wire holding the umbrellas doesn't do much for durability. And over the course of five years, you may have spent more money in umbrellas than you had on one raincoat. The burden of Longevity VS Affordability, however, is easily a point that I feel goes to Con. One of Pro's rebuttals to this was that if you take good care of an umbrella, it should be fine. The problem with this as Con pointed out, is that you don't really have control over this aspect. Harsh wind is probably the best factor in broken umbrellas while a rain coat is form fitting and flexible.

As Con worded, you shouldn't have to "baby" an item in order for it to work for you.

Dryness:

This one I can see points from both sides being valid, but based on personal experience, I would agree that raincoats are better in this aspect. In context to the debate however, I think Con won on this point as well.

Rain does often come in at angles, as perpetuated by the wind. Tilting an umbrella won't fully protect you from all the rain either. It's kind of a simple observation to notice that by tilting an umbrella, you will still be pelted in the lower area, or even in front of you. Also the wind can constantly change course, meaning you would have to constantly be chang
Posted by TUF 3 years ago
TUF
it.

Conduct- I would give this one to Con too. It seems that he accepted the debate under the premise of this debate being purely about dryness only. And given the material in your opening round, I wouldn't blame him. While the points that Pro made concerning umbrella's were definitely relevant, it was slightly unfair of him to make them after saying that the debates true purpose revolves around only dryness. But I won't count this point against pro, because Con was nice enough to argue this point regaurdless.

Reliable Sources- Hands down this goes to Con. Pro gave two sources stating the prices of Umbrellas. These sources don't really do a lot in relation to his arguments. Also the arguments that Con brought up concerning longevity, outweigh the cost factor anyway. But Con made a good decision in price matching affordable raincoats, as well as giving informational and helpful sources concerning principles behind flaws in umbrellas.

For example, the Ehow source contained many arguments that contained some logical flaws that can commonly be found within umbrellas. While Con made is own separate arguments against umbrellas, there was some good knowledgeable material contained within his source that slightly influenced my opinion on the debate.

Overall Con's sources were much more reliable. I might dis-credit the use of Yahoo answers (though I do commonly receive good advice from the site).

One big problem with Conservative's source, though, was that it lacked substance in correlation with his argument. For instance, Pro described these umbrella's as "good, quality raincoat". How do you know that the umbrellas or Raincoats are of good quality, based on a few photo shopped images with a vague description and price listed next to it?

Again while I don't think yahoo answers is much for "proving" anything, the source at least contains arguments that can be weighed and decided upon individually, though I would never count that in favor of the Con.
Posted by TUF 3 years ago
TUF
I am sorry Conservative, I hope there is no contention created from this vote, but I completely have to go with the Con in this debate. I did read the entire thing thoroughly, and you did make several good points, but with both rebuttals, I saw better, or more logical conclusions from the Con.

To start off, I am not going to be too brutal with points, and I will only give Con the arugments points, but technically, I can see how Con is deserving of almost every point in this debate.

Spelling and grammar- This is a minor point, but I noticed a confusing statement made by Pro in his second argument.

"You don't have this ability in a raincoat and if you're walking into the rain your unprotected face will be blasted with water regardless of a hood which goes over your head not your face. "

A use of a comma, or a semi colon would have gone well with this statement.

"Umbrellas allow you to carry items and keep them try while raincoats do not."

I am sure you meant to say "Dry" here, but it was a minor mistake.

"These points, plus the fact that umbrellas are cheaper, dryer, easier to use and are more versatile in their ability to block wind and rain make them far superior to raincoats."

Again, lack of commas, and appropriate punctuation makes this statement a little confusing near the end, though ultimately I understood what you meant.

"You can't easily carry a raincoat around with you in a mall or school or anything."

This one is kind of an obvious one. Again, punctuation, or summing multiple words up into one would have been better.

"Movement, since the water is on your body, will cause the water to move as well enlarging the potential for getting wet. "

I think there is supposed to be an extra "As" in here before "enlarging".

Anyways, Con also made a few mistakes, though not as bad. Run-on sentence, a spacing error, and a debatable spelling mistake. Anyways, since this is a very non-essential point to me given the context of this de
Posted by RedMoonlight 3 years ago
RedMoonlight
Thanks, you too. And I think he knows what he's talking about. Haha
Posted by ConservativePolitico 3 years ago
ConservativePolitico
Did you even read the debate voter? >.> I hate noobs.
Posted by ConservativePolitico 3 years ago
ConservativePolitico
Good debate.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by xXCryptoXx 3 years ago
xXCryptoXx
ConservativePoliticoRedMoonlightTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: Affordability: I'll leave this one at a tie. I agree that in places where it doesn't rain often there is really no need to spend a large amount of money on a raincoat, whereas Con showed that it is indeed worth it when in a place where it rains often. Dryness: This one goes to Con, there's really no contest here. Pro's only argument against raincoats was that it would drip into your pants and shoes, which Con refuted. Con then went on to talk about how raincoats protect more of the body than umbrellas and how umbrellas can be rather inconvenient when trying to get dry. Ease of use: I'll leave this at a tie. Pro showed that the Umbrella can protect your items, but Con showed that that is only true at the cost of one of your hands and that you can still get wet. I was more convinced by Pro that umbrellas were easily stored because Con didn't really show why they couldn't be. Pro showed that when wearing a raincoat your items will get your items wet.
Vote Placed by TUF 3 years ago
TUF
ConservativePoliticoRedMoonlightTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: RFD in comments. I apologize to Con for only awarding the arguments point. I think Con won basically on everything in this debate, however, for intensive purposes involving the true purpose of an RFD, I don't think those other points are so important in a philosophy debate about umbrellas and rain coats. This debate seems to be more based on entertainment, and light-heartedness, IE Fun. In this case, I think it would be abusive to give the rest of the points given the lack of substance and importance that follows behind them. This was definitely a really fun debate to read though. I say welcome to debate.org RedMoonlight, and I think you did a fantastic job in this debate against an equally great challenger. Conservative politico is one of the best debaters on this site, and I think he did an awesome job in this debate to. But I admire you courage in accepting this debate, and think you made excellent counters to the points brought up by conservative. This was a hands down win. GJ!
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
ConservativePoliticoRedMoonlightTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Countering Donjaundebater until his RFD improves. I saw nothing in it to explain the conduct point.
Vote Placed by Donjaundebater1212 3 years ago
Donjaundebater1212
ConservativePoliticoRedMoonlightTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Sorry Pro, A rain coat is over all more durable, and can be used at any time, lasts longer, and you truely get your moneys worth.