Health Benefits of a Round of Golf (calories)

[Evan_Green]

I read somewhere on the internet that you can burn 500-1000 calories playing one round of golf if you carry your clubs. I was somewhat surprised by those numbers since you would have to do a good hour on the treadmill to equal that. Are there any doctors/health experts out there that can vouch for these numbers?

Given these huge health benefits, surprising why anyone would voluntarily choose a cart if given a choice ??

[Jari Rasinkangas]

Evan,

I just read an article in a local newspaper about the calories consumption in different sports activities.  The biggest health institute of Finland has calculated those figures.

For golf they had these results:

Walking with no carry bag: 261 kcal/h (65 kg person), 321 kcal/h (80 kg person)

Walking with carry bag: 359 kcal/h (65 kg), 442 kcal/h (80 kg)

So according to that it burns about 1500 kcal / 4 hour round with carry bag.

Figures for hard gym training are: 391 kcal/h and 482 kcal/h.

According to the researchers your genes also affect the calories consumption.  Not everybody burns the same amount of calories even if they have the same weight and age.

E.g. for two persons with same weight and age the difference in the basic daily consumption can be 500 kcal.  Physical training also increases the physical performance, good HDL cholesterol and decreases blood pressure for some people but for some others it hardly doesn't benefit at all.

Jari

[Jason Topp]

Another way of looking at it.  Under Weight Watchers' point system, I get an average of 31 points per day (calculated based primarily on calories); Walking and carrying a bag for 4 hours is worth an additional 17 points.  It can either amount to weight loss or quite a few beers (3 pts for a regular, 2 pts for a light beer)

For weight loss, golf is better than other exercises primarily because it takes so long.

[BCrosby]

I lost 10 pounds in Scotland two summers ago. Ate like a horse every day. I guess this explains it.

My wife can't wait to go back with me. Not because she cares about golf. She doesn't. It's all about my waistline. Nothing else seems to work.

Talk about a deal that is a win/win....

Bob  

[RE Blanks]

Thanks Bob, you just gave me some more ammo

[Andy Doyle]

Evan:

I'm on the faculty at Georgia State University in Atlanta, with a specialty in Exercise Physiology.  I have a particular interest in golf - from a professional as well as personal standpoint.  Based upon the research studies I have read, I think those numbers are pretty accurate.

Most studies have estimated caloric expenditure while walking the golf course either using caddies or a pull cart.  Caloric expenditure ranges from 4 - 6 kcal per minute or 240 to 360 kcals per hour.

There aren't too many studies that have looked at caloric expenditure while walking and carrying your clubs, but one that I am familiar with estimated energy expenditure from heart rate while walking and carrying on flat, moderate, and hilly golf courses.  As you would expect, you burn more calories when carrying your clubs, and burn more calories as the course gets more hilly.  This study showed caloric expenditures of 435 kcal/hour on a flat course up to 495 kcal/hour on a hilly course.

Because of the difficulty of actually measuring energy expenditure while doing a long duration, free-living activity like golf, most studies estimate energy expenditure from heart rate.  A lot of other factors can affect heart rate during a round of golf, though - stress, heat, etc.  One recent study used a portable device to directly measure energy expenditure while walking (with a pull cart) and playing 2 holes of golf - the energy expenditure was 5.4 kcal per minute or 324 kcal per hour.

A number of studies have also estimate the distance walked during an 18-hole round; reports range from 4-6 miles.  These are often estimated from the course length and estimates of the distance from green to tee, etc.  I think the estimates might be on the low end.  I've been doing some preliminary studies using a GPS system to more accurately measure distance walked - I usually cover about 4.5 miles when I walk 18 holes on the executive-length course I usually play (course length only 3357 yards).

Figuring caloric expenditure sounds precise, but is actually a somewhat ballpark proposition.  One of the main factors is body size - larger people simply expend more energy to move their mass.  If you want to get an idea of your caloric expenditure, it probably makes most sense to use figures that are relative to your body weight.

If you walk and use a pull cart (or a caddy), figure on approximately 2 kilocalories per pound of body weight every hour.

If you walk and carry your clubs, figure up to a maximum of 3 kilocalories per pound of body weight per hour.

Hope this helps,

Andy


Reference List

1. Burkett, L. N. & von Heijne-Fisher, U. (1998). Heart rate and calorie expenditure of golfers carrying their clubs and walking flat and hilly golf courses. International Sports Journal, 78-85.
2. Getchell, L. H. (1968). Energy cost of playing golf. Arch Phys.Med Rehabil., 49, 31-35.
3. Hendelman, D., Miller, K., Baggett, C., Debold, E., & Freedson, P. (2000). Validity of accelerometry for the assessment of moderate intensity physical activity in the field. Med.Sci.Sports Exerc., 32, S442-S449.
4. Lampley, J. H., Lampley, P. M., & Howley, E. T. (1977). Caloric cost of playing golf. Res.Q., 48, 637-639.
5. Murase, Y., Kamei, S., & Hoshikawa, T. (1989). Heart rate and metabolic responses to participation in golf. J.Sports Med.Phys.Fitness, 29, 269-272.
6. Stauch, M., Liu, Y., Giesler, M., & Lehmann, M. (1999). Physical activity level during a round of golf on a hilly course. J.Sports Med.Phys.Fitness, 39, 321-327.
7. Unverdorben, M., Kolb, M., Bauer, I., Bauer, U., Brune, M., Benes, K. et al. (2000). Cardiovascular load of competitive golf in cardiac patients and healthy controls. Med Sci Sports Exerc., 32, 1674-1678.

[Brent Hutto]

Andy,

What's a ballpark baseline metabolic rate if we were, let's say, sitting home watching golf on TV? Maybe 0.8 kcal/kg/hour or so?

My wife works with a bunch of exercise-science types so she probably knows off the top of her head.

[Andy Doyle]

Brent:

Pretty close.  We use an "average" resting oxygen consumption of 3.5 ml/kg/min (much like "average" resting heart rate is 72 bpm).  If you work this out to caloric expenditure it's about:

1.05 kcals/kg/hour

or

0.5 kcals/lb/hour

Andy

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Andy  It is nice to get expert opinions on things. Thank you for your valuable information for we new to healthy living types.

[Andy Doyle]

Tiger:

You bet.  There are some other good studies looking specifically at some health benefits.  A couple have shown that a group playing golf 2-3 times a week (I wish) lost weight, lowered their total cholesterol and LDL (low-density lipoprotein), and raised their HDL (good cholesterol - high-density lipoprotein) compared to the sedentary control group.

Now, if I could only convince my wife that I NEED to play 3 times a week for my health - and convince my insurance company to reimburse my greens fees  

Andy

[Evan_Green]

Thank you to all for your responses on this matter.

Thanks in particular to Andy- yes really great to be able to talk directly to an expert on this matter.

From the numbers you have given (and those given by Jari), golf is an even better form of exercise than I thought (really makes me want to get out there and play even more!)

Andy- do you have any idea how much of that caloric burn you would be inclined to lose if you had to take a cart rather than walk?

Thanks again

[Mark_F]

Evan Green,

I'm not exercise physiologist, just a keen reader, however...

"Health benefits" is a fairly broad canvas.  Getting off one's butt is a health benefit, especially in these sedentary times.

Lugging clubs around a golf course does burn calories, but numerous studies have shown that vigorous exercise, eg. running, swimming, circuit training etc is far more beneficial to your heart and general health and well being than more sedentary exercise such as walking or playing golf, even if you don't burn as many calories.

The average punter would burn around 400-500 calories jogging at a reasonable pace for 30 minutes or so, around half that of a round of golf, yet the health benefits would be far greater from jogging.

High intensity exercise, such as interval training, is the best of all for cardiovascular health.  

But anything is good.

[Jari Rasinkangas]

In addition to physical health benefits I would also like to emphasize the positive mental health effects.

Yes, I know the game makes you mad many times but in a big picture golf is a wonderful hobby that lasts for your whole life.  You can make lifelong friendships with fellow players and the game relieves your work stress.  For retired people the game offers meaningful exercise and social connections.

Mark,

If you want to be really fit golf is not the best sport to exercise but for the majority of the people it is one of the best ways to keep up the condition that is needed for normal life.  The most harmful things for people's health are overweight, smoking, drinking too much etc.  If you get rid of these your life will be longer without doing intensity exercise.

When you get older golf becomes even better way of exercising because you get long lasting effect for your body without high peaks you get on many other sports.  Golf is also a very good way to enhance your basic condition that is the basis for all exercise.  Just saw a programme where people who did regular exercising nearly all had poor basic condition because they did not do anything that keeps your heart rate lower during exercise.  Running, aerobics etc. gets your heart rate very high and that can be even harmful if you do not balance it with long lasting easy exercise.  E.g. cross-country skiers do very long walking exercises during summer training season because of this.

In addition to walking the skiers have invented a very good exercise method called Nordic Walking.  It was first used as a summer training method by professional cross-country skiers. It was then developed into a fitness exercise with specific training equipment.  See this link for more info:
http://www.nordicwalking.com/portal/nordic_walking/english/

Jari

[Evan Fleisher]

All of the above is very good advice..."faster" exercise certainly seem to be better for your overall health...but walking and playing golf on a regular basis can have considerable positive health benefits as well.

I have always been rather slim, and my weight varies in a pretty tight range.  During the winter "hibernation" months I sometimes get up to 158-160 pounds (I'm 36 years old and 5'9") and it's all in my belly area (relatively speaking).  During the Spring and Summer seasons if I'm playing regularly (and walking and carrying which I do 99.9% of the time) my weight fluctuates around 151-153 and occasionally dips under the 150 mark...with all of it coming from around my middle.

I always feel so much better during those seasons because that regular exercise gives me a much better feel physically (and probably mentally as well) since I'm much more active than during the cold/sedentary winter time.

Just my own observations.

[Andy Doyle]

Clearly golf falls into the category of "moderate-intensity physical activity" - if you walk.  Numerous studies have demonstrated the importance of regular physical activity - people that engage in even moderate levels of activity for the most part have lower cholesterol, resting blood pressure, less obesity, diabetes, and dramatically reduced risk of chronic diseases (e.g. cardiovascular disease, cancer, stroke, etc.).

We tend to define "exercise" as a subset of physical activity - it tends to be more purposeful, particularly emphasizing a particular component of fitness.  Aerobic exercise, such as running, has the most impact on aerobic or cardiorespiratory fitness.  Strength training or lifting weights obviously impacts muscular strength and endurance.  Studies of large populations show that there are greater health benefits as one becomes more fit.  Certainly to achieve higher levels of fitness, most people need to participate in more vigorous activities.

I don't think anyone would argue that playing golf is good "exercise."  The nice thing, though, is that it definitely counts as excellent physical activity, and a relatively large number of calories can be burned because of the long duration (~ 4 hours) of the activity.  If I walk, I don't need to feel guilty when I play, I can tell my wife "I walked 6 miles today."

Evan - I don't know the answer to your question about playing with a cart.  I haven't seen any published studies.  However, I hope to have some information on that very question as we are planning to do a study this year tracking the amount of distance walked when riding versus walking on the course.  

Andy

[Brent Hutto]

Evan - I don't know the answer to your question about playing with a cart.  I haven't seen any published studies.  However, I hope to have some information on that very question as we are planning to do a study this year tracking the amount of distance walked when riding versus walking on the course.  

Andy,

Are you going to use pedometers or accelerometers versus attempting to get actual distance data with something like GPS? I guess it depends on whether your outcome is MVPA or distance covered per se.

For my part, I'd like to see intensity and duration of the multiple bouts of PA that make up a round of golf. I'm most familiar with getting that from belt-mounted accelerometers although that's certainly far from a gold standard. I also guess you'd have to somewhat adjust for carrying clubs versus pushing/pulling a trolley versus riding in a cart and just walking to the ball with a couple clubs.

[Andy Doyle]

Brent:

We actually have a series of studies in mind - only limited by time and funding.  

The initial study is going to use a GPS based system to track actual distance walked.  The system I have been playing around with also looks at elevation changes based upon the GPS coordinates.  I think GPS systems will work pretty well for outdoor activities like golf where you typically get a steady satellite signal.

We are attempting to purchase a portable metabolic measurement system that can be worn during free living activities like golf.  They are very expensive, but provide the type of oxygen consumption/caloric expenditure data that you can only estimate from other measurements (e.g. heart rate).  This equipment would allow us to determine more precisely the energy expenditure requirements of different playing conditions - walk/caddy, walk/pullcart, walk/carry, ride, etc, but would allow us to compare it to the subject's maximal ability so we can get a handle on relative energy expenditure.  How intense is this activity as a percentage of their max?

Lots of ideas.  Not so much time or money!

Andy

[Brent Hutto]

I don't know much about the technology but courses with GPS mapping on the golf carts have additional fixed transmitters of some kind there on the golf course to augment the GPS signals. It would probably be nice if the unit being worn by the golfer could take advantage of that information, too. Of course then you'd have to do the study at a GPS-equipped golf course.

[blasbe1]

I don't know guys, what the heck do the Stadler boys eat if they burn all those calories and still look like that?

I've always found it difficult to believe that non-aerobic calorie burning ala golf aided weight loss/stability the way that aerobic calorie burning did.

   

[Brent Hutto]

I've always found it difficult to believe that non-aerobic calorie burning ala golf aided weight loss/stability the way that aerobic calorie burning did.

A lot of subsumed in the phrase "the way that". I'm not very education on physiology but one part I do understand is this. If you engage in any activity that requires a kilocalorie of energy, that kilocalorie shows up on the debit side of your weight gain/loss equation. So "the way that" moderate physical activity aids weight loss stability is almost entirely through simple energy balance.

Some forms of activity, especially those that involve adding muscle mass, have additional benefits beyond the energy-balance contribution of their immediate caloric expenditure. Fitter people are therefore on a different curve of activity vs. diet vs. weight than sedentary people.

The details get more complicated than my background allows me to understand but the principle is that a kilocalorie is a kilocalorie and the relationship of kilocalories to weight over time is fixed for any given body composition. However, some types of activity affect body composition and that's where the complexity arises when comparing moderate activity to fitness- or muscle-building activity.

Or something like that...

[Doug Siebert]

Andy,

It seems to me that going by kcal/hr isn't very instructive.  Say I played two rounds on a 7000 yard course, by myself for simplicity (so I'm not looking for anyone's ball but my own) and by some miracle (or curse) I play both rounds exactly the same way.  I hit it into the same spots on every shot, shoot the same score.  However, during the first round I'm alone on the course and finish in 2.5 hours, and in the second round its packed and I'm behind a dozen foursomes and never play through, and it takes 5 hours.  Going by kcal/hr would suggest I'd burn twice as many calories in the slow round.

However, since I walked the same distance, and the intensity was higher because I'm walking faster and not taking a 5 minute break before every full shot to wait on the people in front, I would think I'd burn about the same number of calories, if you discount the basal metabolic rate for the remaining 2.5 hours I'm sitting at home watching TV after the quick round.  OK, maybe it takes more calories to be standing/pacing while waiting (I don't ever sit on the bench by the tee) versus sitting in front of the TV, but I can't believe there is that much of a difference.  The only elevation my heart rate gets while standing around waiting is anger at the slow-playing buffoons in front of me

It would be neat if you did get additional funding, I'd like to see whether you'd get a better fit going by kcal/hr or kcal/yard.  Obviously 7000 hilly yards is worth more than 7000 flat yards, a wild hitter walks further than a straight hitter, and walking a cartball course gives you a mile or two extra walking between tees.  But I would still be surprised if kcal/yard on the scorecard wouldn't be a better fit.  Waiting just can't burn many calories.

[Mark_F]

Doug,

The faster you you played, the more beneficial it would be. Obviously, a hillier course would also be more beneficial, as much the same way as running inclines on a treadmill can be more beneficial than doing constant flats. What goes up, must come down, remember.  

You would have to be a REALLY wild hitter to get much more 'benefit' than a straight hitter.

Golf does burn a lot of calories, it just isn't very efficient because of time spent.  

[Doug Siebert]

You would have to be a REALLY wild hitter to get much more 'benefit' than a straight hitter.

Oh man, you just gotta play with me on a bad day sometime, you'd be amazed.  Though it probably isn't so much the diagonal walking to the ball as the slow circles sometimes required to find it when its well off the beaten path.  Plus I'm sure walking through small hills of foot deep fescue is a much better workout than walking straight down a relatively flat closely mown fairway!

[Jason McNamara]

Lugging clubs around a golf course does burn calories, but numerous studies have shown that vigorous exercise, eg. running, swimming, circuit training etc is far more beneficial to your heart and general health and well being than more sedentary exercise such as walking or playing golf, even if you don't burn as many calories.

Or as my doc told me, "Walking the course shouldn't be your exercise.  It should be your day off from exercise."

That one hurt.

Jason

[Mark_F]

Jason,

Demand an apology, or warn him/her they may be struck off.  
The fool.

Doug,

As long as there's a cart handy for when I've burned up my 750 calories.  Hopefully you're not that wild it will be required on the front nine?