TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Talk › calories burned walking 18 holes
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

calories burned walking 18 holes - Page 4

post #55 of 112
8/2/10 at 9:45pm

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

Originally Posted by iacas View Post
It doesn't require a lot of muscular effort though. The vast majority of the forces that counter-act gravity is handled by your bones.
That's not true. The more you weigh, the more force is exerted by your muscles with every step you take. When you work out, your muscles are what get bigger/stronger - your muscles are what's applying the resistance against the force of gravity (or the free weights), not your bones. Your bones provide the levers through which the force is applied, not the force itself.

The house analogy is not a good one. Houses remain standing for the same reason we don't sink into the ground when we lay down. Once we stand up though, we are actively applying force (read: burning more calories) to remain standing, to balance, to walk (whether up hills or on flat terrain), etc.
Reply
Reply

TheSandTrap.com Top Picks

post #56 of 112
8/2/10 at 10:01pm

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

Originally Posted by Shanks A Million View Post
It takes more energy to keep the body cool in hot weather.
Same with keeping your body warm in cold weather.

Originally Posted by iacas View Post
I know that. It doesn't require a lot of muscular effort though. The vast majority of the forces that counter-act gravity is handled by your bones. We're not boneless blobs that use our muscles to entirely support our weight (or whatever we're carrying).

Houses remains standing without muscles. Their bones - the wood - supports the weight. Just like in our bodies.
That houses analogy makes sense for standing still, but walking is different. I would guess it would be several times the 100 number. More like 300-400. But then again, I haven't done the experiment, they did.
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 112
8/2/10 at 10:11pm

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

You can argue about many calories are burned till you're blue in the face, but take a look at the walkers and riders at your course and tell me which the ones closer to a normal weight? And then compare casual golfers to casual runners/cyclists/other aerobic sports. Many golfers are overweight. Whatever number of calories is being burned, it isn't enough with regards to having the optimal weight. When I carry on a hilly course on a hot day, people think it's some kind of miracle that I do so.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 112
8/2/10 at 11:32pm

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

Carrying is much more fatiguing than having a push cart. I have a old man push cart and thought I'd start carrying again since I am in better shape. Did it for 18 holes and just didn't like the extra work and missed my cart. Walking 18 is really nothing if your in decent shape particularly if you use a push cart. I don't feel fatigued at all unless it is just sick hot out and it is a really tough walking course. It is nothing compared to working out of any kind.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 112
8/2/10 at 11:49pm

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

Originally Posted by sacm3bill View Post
That's not true. The more you weigh, the more force is exerted by your muscles with every step you take.
I'm sorry, but it is. I've not said that it requires NO extra effort, I've said it requires LITTLE extra energy.

Originally Posted by sacm3bill View Post
When you work out, your muscles are what get bigger/stronger - your muscles are what's applying the resistance against the force of gravity (or the free weights), not your bones.
That doesn't even make sense. You're comparing an activity done to specifically target muscles with carrying something that's designed to be carried in order to minimize its impact on muscles? We don't stretch our arms out in front of us and carry the golf bag in our outstretched hands. That would offer no skeletal support. We carry our bags the way we do specifically to use our skeletons and to minimize the effort.

Look at the women in Africa that carry two things of water on a stick over their shoulders - they're using their skeletons. Yes, the initial lifting requires effort, but after that significantly less effort is required to move horizontally. Or the ones who put baskets of rice on their heads. Skeletal support. Why do you think we have skeletons - to do this sort of stuff.

Originally Posted by sacm3bill View Post
The house analogy is not a good one. Houses remain standing for the same reason we don't sink into the ground when we lay down. Once we stand up though, we are actively applying force (read: burning more calories) to remain standing, to balance, to walk (whether up hills or on flat terrain), etc.
I can stand still without having to "use" my muscles. So can you.

Originally Posted by jamo View Post
That houses analogy makes sense for standing still, but walking is different. I would guess it would be several times the 100 number. More like 300-400. But then again, I haven't done the experiment, they did.
Exactly - you're wrong. Walking with weight does not significantly add to the amount of energy needed.

You guys are arguing when there's a study right there that backs up what I'm saying. 100 extra calories... the added weight is a bigger factor when a) you pick up and set the bag down, and b) you go up a hill. The horizontal movement while carrying requires significantly less energy than those two acts.

The article backs up the physics (and vice versa). I'm done.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 112
8/2/10 at 11:50pm

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

Average person burns 100 calories per mile, walking or running. The more you weigh the more you burn, but not lilkely to exceed 150 calories per mile. If you want to get a more accurate number use a heart rate monitor and wear it on the course. It will provide you with a graph of your heartrate over the round, and calories burned.
Reply
Reply
post #61 of 112
8/3/10 at 12:37am

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

As much as I want to question it, the below study gives the same results, almost exactly.

http://golf.about.com/od/fitnessheal...lfphysical.htm
Reply
Reply
post #62 of 112
8/3/10 at 12:41am

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

He's right, if you look at the weight difference of 27 lbs, that gives only a difference of 1 calorie per minute. If you take a golf course to be 6200 yards, if you don't hit it straight, probably 7000 yards walking, your looking at about 30 minutes of walking time, total. thats only 30 extra calories over 18 holes.

Now going up and down hills, that will strain your quads more, definetly, do some squates with 15lbs in each hand, you get worn out fast.
Lifting the bag isn't that bad, because its only one rep then the weight gets absorbed over the body after you put it on your shoulders.
Reply
Reply
post #63 of 112
8/3/10 at 12:45am

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

Originally Posted by jamo View Post
As much as I want to question it, the below study gives the same results, almost exactly.

http://golf.about.com/od/fitnessheal...lfphysical.htm
http://myfitnesscaddy.com/blog/?p=93
http://www.golflink.com/facts_4469_m...golf-burn.html

There are some other ones. I saw the about.com one as well.

My older sister has three doctorates, and they're all related to human kinesiology. The way she put it to me was this: "Additional weight carried properly has an almost neglible impact on energy output." She said that it obviously comes into play when walking on an incline.

She pointed out that people who want to walk with ankle weights put them... on their ankles where they're required to be lifted repeatedly. She said a pair of two-pound ankle weight expends more energy than a 25-pound weight around your hips.

She also said that a 250-pound man carrying nothing and a 200-pound man with a 50 pound bag carried properly aren't the same at all because the 200-pound man's heart isn't trying to pump blood through the golf bag while the 250-pound man's heart is having to pump blood through a whole lot of extra flesh.

Funny, the amateur scientists on here. How about we stick to golf? I think we can all agree that walking is better for you, and if you carry, have a caddie, or pull or push a cart, good for you.
Reply
Reply
post #64 of 112
8/3/10 at 3:16am

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

The previous estimates that are around 1000 - 1500 calories for walking and a little less for carts seems too high.

Let's work backwards. If you play 18 twice a week, you'll burn 2000-3000 calories a week thus losing a pound a week. If you play the whole season, say 6 months, 24 weeks, you'll lose 24 pounds during the golf season.

If golfers lose 24 pounds a year playing golf, why are a majority of them still overweight? Golfers are voracious eaters?

For 18 holes, I'd say 500 calories, max, walking. 250 tops. with a cart, probably less.
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 112
8/3/10 at 3:20am

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

Originally Posted by nevets88 View Post
For 18 holes, I'd say 500 calories, max, walking. 250 tops. with a cart, probably less.
You have to read the rest of the posts on this thread. Out of all of today's posts that resurrected this thread there have been 4 studies listed, all saying for 18 holes you burn well over 500 calories.
Reply
Reply
post #66 of 112
8/3/10 at 2:17pm

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

I would guess somewhere in the 500 calorie range, mabye 650ish. Jogging for an hour at a 7 mpm pace burns approx. 1,600 calories and I can tell you, jogging for an hour is a lot more demanding than walking 18 holes. Not to mention, if you're drinking Gatorade, eating snacks while you play, you're pretty much negating any calories you do burn while playing.
Reply
Reply
post #67 of 112
8/3/10 at 2:27pm

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

Around these parts we play in 100+ degree weather between May and September. I would bet I burned 1200 calories playing 27 holes last saturday at 100* weather. Carrying clubs.
Reply
Reply
post #68 of 112
8/3/10 at 2:54pm

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

Most of those numbers seem really high. After 30 minutes on the eliptical at an average of 7-8mph and HR of 160-170 I only burn about 250-300 calories at most.
Reply
Reply
post #69 of 112
8/3/10 at 4:23pm

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

No, the 1,500 calorie estimates are about right. You've got to remember, a round takes 4 hours. In that time, just by natural metabolism, you'd burn a good number of calories, so spending it carrying a bag up and down hills, raking bunkers, and making swings would add significantly to that number.

The study I had read in Men's health years ago said 1,100 for walking 18. The reason golfers can still be out of shape? It's not a physically demanding game in which health is required. You couldn't have a guy on your NBA team with a huge gut, right? Well, you can play golf like that. Remember that burning large quantities of calories is not equal to being in good shape. You can go burn 1,100 calories, and then eat 1,500 after the round just as easily.
Reply
Reply
post #70 of 112
8/3/10 at 5:38pm

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

Originally Posted by Shanks A Million View Post
No, the 1,500 calorie estimates are about right. You've got to remember, a round takes 4 hours. In that time, just by natural metabolism, you'd burn a good number of calories, so spending it carrying a bag up and down hills, raking bunkers, and making swings would add significantly to that number.

The study I had read in Men's health years ago said 1,100 for walking 18. The reason golfers can still be out of shape? It's not a physically demanding game in which health is required. You couldn't have a guy on your NBA team with a huge gut, right? Well, you can play golf like that. Remember that burning large quantities of calories is not equal to being in good shape. You can go burn 1,100 calories, and then eat 1,500 after the round just as easily.
Or drink 1500 calories while on the course! Long live weekend golf!
Reply
Reply
post #71 of 112
8/3/10 at 5:42pm

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

Seriously though. 1,100 sounds about right. Remember that you're almost constantly moving for 4 hours during a round. Half an hour on a treadmill at a comfortable pace burns about 300-400.

I lost about 20 pounds playing golf last year in about 6 weeks. Granted, I played about 3 or 4 times a week, walked all the time, and didn't eat or drink much besides water on the course.
Reply
Reply
post #72 of 112
8/3/10 at 5:49pm

Re: calories burned walking 18 holes

Originally Posted by nevets88 View Post
The previous estimates that are around 1000 - 1500 calories for walking and a little less for carts seems too high.

Let's work backwards. If you play 18 twice a week, you'll burn 2000-3000 calories a week thus losing a pound a week. If you play the whole season, say 6 months, 24 weeks, you'll lose 24 pounds during the golf season.

If golfers lose 24 pounds a year playing golf, why are a majority of them still overweight? Golfers are voracious eaters?

For 18 holes, I'd say 500 calories, max, walking. 250 tops. with a cart, probably less.
Because relatively few golfers walk for most of their rounds, and american diets are still atrocious. But during golf season, i'll lose 15-20 pds easy, and then ill ballon back up over the winter.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Golf Talk

TheSandTrap.com Top Picks

TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Talk › calories burned walking 18 holes