Cycling's popularity affecting golfing numbers?

Budawanny

fred funk }{ wrote: »

That's where I started golfing lol.

I was using that as a counter arguement to his €50 bike and stating cycling was cheaper than golf, I disagree.. Nobody who gets into cycling uses a bike worth €50.

My point is if you get into either sport seriously, cycling is more expensive. With a quick google search there's bikes for over 10k. Cheaper than golf me bollix.

bikes that professionals race the tour de france on cost 10,000. Literally.

A quick google shows one single golf club for 4000.

its a pointless argument using the cost of professional equipment for a hobbie comparison.

besides cost comparisons of the two sports isn't very smart anyway. both can be expensive. and both can be cheap. More likely the reason that cycling gained popularlity is the cost of club memberships during the tiger alongside an increased awareness of personal fitness.

Bigus

I’ve participated in both , and find cycling way less expensive than golf , particularly if you want to be a member in Dublin, also you don’t need a fancy car to go cycling in, but for a lot of people this is a prerequisite for keeping up appearances in the golf club , although a bit less so since drink driving has tightened up.

One thing is for certain though , you will not get super fit or even aerobically fit playing golf , but you can, if you do enough cycling in the hills, also older people get less problems with joints and limbs, backs, too cycling vs golf unless you get knocked down, but on the other hand I know more than one irish person first hand who got killed or lost their sight on a golf course after being hit by wayward balls.

Ryder

I fall right into the middle of the 30-50 demographic. Was a reasonably competitive road cyclist and sportive competitor. Taken up golf in the last year

Accessability - No contest, cycling wins. Go anywhere and anytime. No issues with courses being packed. Once you can turn a pedal you can accompany anyone without disrupting (or feeling like you are) their game.

Cost - Again no contest. 1500 to 2000 will get you a decent carbon bike with a good groupset that would see you for 5 years. Consumables cost less than the petrol you use to go golfing. A mid range golf set costs similar but the difference will be in club subs

time - Similar time commitment, and add the inevitable extra cycling training you will do/need mid week. The difference is the time is at your choosing so you can go very early or late and arent as fixed as with golf

so why choose golf....socially its more fun, for all the reasons above I didnt find cycling particularly social because I was heading out solo to maximise training time. Also golf is more enjoyable. I think the 18 holes is killing the game nowadays....4 hours for a round and add in an hour either side - thats 6 straight hours gone......I couldnt justify that more than once every month or two

paulanthony

As someone who has dabbled in both I think I can say cycling is less expensive and less time consuming.

Both are very "gadgety" pastimes where you can definitely spend ridiculous amounts on equipment so I think it's a bit pointless saying there are 20 grand bikes out there, thousand euro drivers, Adare Manor green fees etc. The reality is what is required to practice the sport at a very average level (I'm not talking talent here, I mean the average requirements to play the sport).

Golf - essentially it is:
- a reasonable set of irons/woods/putter which can be assembled and improved over time. Not necessarily a once off cost. Maybe €1,500 on average if you're buying new and buying middle of the road gear;

- club membership: this is where the real difference is, in my opinion, as someone who lives in South Dublin City, my options are generally limited to expensive clubs (many with big joining fees) and 2k a year subs. Other option is to join somewhere way down the road in Kildare/Wicklow etc. If you live in the midlands (for example) you will have much more budget friendly options (due to demand, rather than quality); PS: you could argue that membership isn't necessary and that you could join a society or a really cheap club for a GUI and play opens etc, but I think if you are talking about doing both properly, then you have to factor in the average cost of joining a club;

- misc: competition fees, balls, couple of lessons, petrol, some clothing.


Cycling:
- I bought a €1000 bike on the cycle to work scheme a few years ago (Felt, some carbon, Shimano 105s for those in the know (so a decent middle of the road model)); for the €1000, they threw in pedals and shoes and I had a decent helmet already. So this cost me around €480 total. I bought some cycling clothing in Aldi / online - probably for €150 total. I have had my bike serviced once since and have bought the very odd piece of clothing here and there (and I would generally be susceptible to buying a gadget etc). Joining a club (if you choose to) is generally cheap (like under €100).

I think that shows that cycling is a bit cheaper.

I also find/found cycling easier to find time to do. On summer evenings you can do a quick spin up to Howth and at weekends can start early and decide your own time (ie you can go for a 1/2/3/4/5/6 hour cycle). You can't decide to go for a 2.5 hour game of golf on Sundays. You are also cycling the minute you go out the gate, whereas with golf you are probably standing on the first tee 45 minutes after leaving the house (unless you are very very near).

They're both great sports and I have never really (in the past) viewed them as in competition with each other but as I have gotten a bit older, married, had a child I can 100% see that it would be easier for me to get out for a cycle on a weekend morning than a round of golf (and probably an easier sell as it's healthier too).

spacecoyote

Seve OB wrote: »

I'm sure I'll get a smack the next time he sees me but the question has to be asked!!! Is that Macker or just his doppleganger

I'd watch yourself. Likely to get a broken trolley across the back of your head

GreeBo

Bigus wrote: »

I’ve participated in both , and find cycling way less expensive than golf , particularly if you want to be a member in Dublin, also you don’t need a fancy car to go cycling in, but for a lot of people this is a prerequisite for keeping up appearances in the golf club , although a bit less so since drink driving has tightened up.

One thing is for certain though , you will not get super fit or even aerobically fit playing golf , but you can, if you do enough cycling in the hills, also older people get less problems with joints and limbs, backs, too cycling vs golf unless you get knocked down, but on the other hand I know more than one irish person first hand who got killed or lost their sight on a golf course after being hit by wayward balls.

Ah here...so now golf is expensive because *you* feel you need to drive a nice car to the golf club??

As for fitness, cycling is much more efficient than walking, so you can easily burn more calories playing golf than cycling, it all depends on how you cycle.

Finally you can play as much or as little golf as you want, especially with the addition of 9 hole qualifying comps, you'd be hard pressed to be "into cycling" but not go out for at least a couple of hours.

Ryder wrote: »

I fall right into the middle of the 30-50 demographic. Was a reasonably competitive road cyclist and sportive competitor. Taken up golf in the last year

Accessability - No contest, cycling wins. Go anywhere and anytime. No issues with courses being packed. Once you can turn a pedal you can accompany anyone without disrupting (or feeling like you are) their game.

Cost - Again no contest. 1500 to 2000 will get you a decent carbon bike with a good groupset that would see you for 5 years. Consumables cost less than the petrol you use to go golfing. A mid range golf set costs similar but the difference will be in club subs

time - Similar time commitment, and add the inevitable extra cycling training you will do/need mid week. The difference is the time is at your choosing so you can go very early or late and arent as fixed as with golf

so why choose golf....socially its more fun, for all the reasons above I didnt find cycling particularly social because I was heading out solo to maximise training time. Also golf is more enjoyable. I think the 18 holes is killing the game nowadays....4 hours for a round and add in an hour either side - thats 6 straight hours gone......I couldnt justify that more than once every month or two

but you can play as much or as little golf as you want, you dont have to play an 18 hole strokes comp, you could just play 6 or 9 holes or hit the practice range for half an hour.
Its unfair to imply cycling is better because you can do it whenever you want, you can "golf" whenever you want also, but if you want to enter a comp IN EITHER then you are constrained by times set by others. Golf is arguably "better" since you have hours within which you can enter the comp or often multiple days, I dont think the same is true for a road race for example...

Johnny_Fontane

Interesting discussion.

The time with golf is the real problem but let's be honest here, it's a morning or an afternoon, once every weekend. Nothing more.

I have three young kids under 10. I did a deal with my wife, and we divide the weekend into four quarters. I take one quarter for golf and am there for the other three to manage kids sports etc.

If people can't genuinely get out for one morning /afternoon a weekend, you need to have a chat with your partner

blue note

GreeBo wrote: »

As for fitness, cycling is much more efficient than walking, so you can easily burn more calories playing golf than cycling, it all depends on how you cycle.

Ah here, I'll just provide this link in case someone mistakenly thinks golf can burn calories more efficiently than cycling. The only type of cycling golf can burn more than is the type you do bringing your toddlers for a cycle - that level of exertion. Looking at the figures in the link, I suspect they're including resting calories in the figure. For someone my size I burn about 180 per hour sitting on my backside so would only be burning an extra 180 calories per hour golfing compared to an extra 470 calories in a "moderate" cycle.

Even if the figures are additional calories there's still a huge difference between cycling and golf.

Also, you never get your heart going playing golf. The heart is the most important muscle to exercise and cycling does that. Golf does not.

https://www.nutristrategy.com/caloriesburned.htm

spacecoyote

Johnny_Fontane wrote: »

Interesting discussion.

The time with golf is the real problem but let's be honest here, it's a morning or an afternoon, once every weekend. Nothing more.

I have three young kids under 10. I did a deal with my wife, and we divide the weekend into four quarters. I take one quarter for golf and am there for the other three to manage kids sports etc.

If people can't genuinely get out for one morning /afternoon a weekend, you need to have a chat with your partner

I think if I gave up golf the wife would divorce me

GreeBo

blue note wrote: »

Ah here, I'll just provide this link in case someone mistakenly thinks golf can burn calories more efficiently than cycling. The only type of cycling golf can burn more than is the type you do bringing your toddlers for a cycle - that level of exertion. Looking at the figures in the link, I suspect they're including resting calories in the figure. For someone my size I burn about 180 per hour sitting on my backside so would only be burning an extra 180 calories per hour golfing compared to an extra 470 calories in a "moderate" cycle.

Even if the figures are additional calories there's still a huge difference between cycling and golf.

Firstly I didnt say you can burn calories more efficently playing golf than cycling, so you've started off on the wrong foot altogether!
What I actually said was that cycling is more efficient than walking.

It totally depends on how you cycle, a bike is very efficient, thats why you can cycle further than you can run or walk, the bike is doing lots of the work.

I'm not arguing that golf burns more calories than all cycling, just that, like most sports you can do it at whatever exertion levels you want.
I've been in a peloton doing a sustained 25km/h for an hour that was minimal effort due to flat terrain and drafting.
I've also played 18 holes in under 2 hours and was bollixed afterwards.

blue note wrote: »

Also, you never get your heart going playing golf. The heart is the most important muscle to exercise and cycling does that. Golf does not.

You've clearly never left yourself a downhill, left to right 3 footer to win something!

blue note

GreeBo wrote: »

Firstly I didnt say you can burn calories more efficently playing golf than cycling, so you've started off on the wrong foot altogether!
What I actually said was that cycling is more efficient than walking.

It totally depends on how you cycle, a bike is very efficient, thats why you can cycle further than you can run or walk, the bike is doing lots of the work.

I'm not arguing that golf burns more calories than all cycling, just that, like most sports you can do it at whatever exertion levels you want.
I've been in a peloton doing a sustained 25km/h for an hour that was minimal effort due to flat terrain and drafting.
I've also played 18 holes in under 2 hours and was bollixed afterwards.


You've clearly never left yourself a downhill, left to right 3 footer to win something!

Sorry, help me understand. When you say cycling is more efficient than walking, are you saying that per kilometre you'd burn more calories walking than cycling? If that's what you're saying I don't see how that's relevant. You might walk 10k playing golf in 4 hours. Or you could cycle 10k in a fairly leisurely 30 minute cycle. But so what?

Under what sort of circumstances would you burn more calories playing golf than cycling?

GreeBo

blue note wrote: »

Sorry, help me understand. When you say cycling is more efficient than walking, are you saying that per kilometre you'd burn more calories walking than cycling? If that's what you're saying I don't see how that's relevant. You might walk 10k playing golf in 4 hours. Or you could cycle 10k in a fairly leisurely 30 minute cycle. But so what?

Yes, I'm saying that the bike does or at least can do an awful lot of the work involved in getting from A to B on a bike.

I was responding to this point
"One thing is for certain though , you will not get super fit or even aerobically fit playing golf , but you can, if you do enough cycling in the hills"

On one hand the point is made that cycling is super accessible and that you can just hop on a bike for half an hour, which while true, is certainly not cycling in the hills, so not really a fair point to use against golf.

You can cycle without being fit and you can play golf without being fit, both activities will arguably be performed better and probably enjoyed more with a higher level of fitness.

Under what sort of circumstances would you burn more calories playing golf than cycling?

That's kind of a tautology, you do it in the circumstances where you burn fewer calories cycling than you did playing golf.

I commuted by bike for years, every day I passed hundreds of people also on bikes who were cycling at 10km/h at best, in full suits without so much as a sheen of sweat, I also passed people walking the same routes who were indeed working up a sweat, without even having to swing a club.

The point is that its not black and white and its disingenuous for anyone to say that it is.

/edit
a quick google give a figure of 474 calories burnt per hour playing golf, assuming you carried your clubs and 250+ per hour on the driving range.

I could easily cycle for an hour and not burn anywhere near that level of calories.

PhilOssophy

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/david-mcwilliams-lurid-gear-and-swanky-bikes-mark-cycling-as-the-new-golf-1.3500071

This wasn't the original article that I read (its 2 years old) which got me thinking about this, but I will find it.

EDIT : This was it. https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/other-sports/the-cycling-boom-how-popular-is-it-and-is-it-expensive-1.3984216

Wildly Boaring

Outsider here, saw this on front page.

Very interesting thread. Awful to hear Hollystown is closing.

Almost 40 so smack in middle.
I came from a different sport entirely at a competitive level and now over last few years trying different sports.

Tried a good bit in the last say 4 years: golf, cycling, running, badminton, gymwork.

It's been stated several times but time would be my no 1. 2 young kids.
For a quick "blast"
25 mins can give me a 5k run.
2hrs do a nice hilly cycle.
1hr and small travel is a gym session
3hrs plus and bit travel for golf.
Badminton I loved did for a full year 2 hours twice a week. But inflexible.

Out with mates / club
2 hrs run
3 hrs + cycle
4 hrs + golf and travel
2 hrs badminton
Gym antisocial

With running and cycling I get get a quick evening spin in and it starts at the door. This is huge.

On the cost
Golf and cycle are comparable but green fees or membership mean far likelier to stick to the bike.

Ultimately I enjoy keeping several forms of exercise going. Golf cannot fit into that life for me due to time and green fees.

Fr Tod Umptious

In the mid 1990s my father used to lament that there were not as many young people out fishing on the local lakes as there were when he was young (1950s/60s)

He put it down to the popularity of golf.

The same seems to be happening with golf now with the popularity of cycling.

Ah_go_on

Wildly Boaring wrote: »

Outsider here, saw this on front page.

Very interesting thread. Awful to hear Hollystown is closing.

Almost 40 so smack in middle.
I came from a different sport entirely at a competitive level and now over last few years trying different sports.

Tried a good bit in the last say 4 years: golf, cycling, running, badminton, gymwork.

It's been stated several times but time would be my no 1. 2 young kids.
For a quick "blast"
25 mins can give me a 5k run.
2hrs do a nice hilly cycle.
1hr and small travel is a gym session
3hrs plus and bit travel for golf.
Badminton I loved did for a full year 2 hours twice a week. But inflexible.

Out with mates / club
2 hrs run
3 hrs + cycle
4 hrs + golf and travel
2 hrs badminton
Gym antisocial

With running and cycling I get get a quick evening spin in and it starts at the door. This is huge.

On the cost
Golf and cycle are comparable but green fees or membership mean far likelier to stick to the bike.

Ultimately I enjoy keeping several forms of exercise going. Golf cannot fit into that life for me due to time and green fees.

Great post.

PhilOssophy

Ah_go_on wrote: »

Great post.

Think he sums up my problem too!

GreeBo

Wildly Boaring wrote: »

Outsider here, saw this on front page.

Very interesting thread. Awful to hear Hollystown is closing.

Almost 40 so smack in middle.
I came from a different sport entirely at a competitive level and now over last few years trying different sports.

Tried a good bit in the last say 4 years: golf, cycling, running, badminton, gymwork.

It's been stated several times but time would be my no 1. 2 young kids.
For a quick "blast"
25 mins can give me a 5k run.
2hrs do a nice hilly cycle.
1hr and small travel is a gym session
3hrs plus and bit travel for golf.
Badminton I loved did for a full year 2 hours twice a week. But inflexible.

Out with mates / club
2 hrs run
3 hrs + cycle
4 hrs + golf and travel
2 hrs badminton
Gym antisocial

With running and cycling I get get a quick evening spin in and it starts at the door. This is huge.

On the cost
Golf and cycle are comparable but green fees or membership mean far likelier to stick to the bike.

Ultimately I enjoy keeping several forms of exercise going. Golf cannot fit into that life for me due to time and green fees.

its a good post but again I'd point out that you dont have to play 4 hours of golf, you could play 9 holes with your mates in the same way you could choose to go for a 2 hour cycle rather than a 4 hour cycle...

Tombo2001

A few views on this one:

(i) There is a greater focus on health in middle age. For me - golf just doesnt cut it. For healthier heart, cycling is way ahead imho.

(ii) Something thats not spoken about at all in all the health columns of the newspapers:

There are a hell of a lot of sports that become challenging as you get older. Specifically challenging on knees, shoulders - arthritis related injuries.

Running, tennis, squash, soccer, gaa and so on and so forth.

There are very few options at this age - cycling and swimming are where its at - if you want to stay fit.

(iii) golf is massively time consuming. cycling is also time consuming, but less so.

paulanthony

GreeBo wrote: »

its a good post but again I'd point out that you dont have to play 4 hours of golf, you could play 9 holes with your mates in the same way you could choose to go for a 2 hour cycle rather than a 4 hour cycle...

...and you could cycle to the end of the road and back and be done in four minutes.

But if you want to play golf properly, you want to play on a Saturday or Sunday morning comp in your local club, probably three times a month (and some a lot more than that). A 7:30 am tee time probably involves getting up at 6:30 leaving home at 7:00, walk up the 18th at 11:30 (all going well) and driving out the gate at close to 12:00. That's best case scenario with a nearby course.

I probably play golf five times a year with friends, so I don't think I could say I am a golfer / I play golf / golf is one of my pastimes.

Mantis Toboggan

Nobody says you need to enter competitions and play 18 holes, do you enter competitions on the bike?

GreeBo

paulanthony wrote: »

...and you could cycle to the end of the road and back and be done in four minutes.

But if you want to play golf properly, you want to play on a Saturday or Sunday morning comp in your local club, probably three times a month (and some a lot more than that). A 7:30 am tee time probably involves getting up at 6:30 leaving home at 7:00, walk up the 18th at 11:30 (all going well) and driving out the gate at close to 12:00. That's best case scenario with a nearby course.

I probably play golf five times a year with friends, so I don't think I could say I am a golfer / I play golf / golf is one of my pastimes.

If you want to cycle "properly" then you also need to getup at 6:30 so that you can cycle the sally-gap and be back before lunch too...

You cant compare "serious" golf with "casual" cycling and then say golf takes more time.

I cycled Dublin to Galway once, I could have played 3 rounds of golf in the same timeframe, ergo cycling takes more effort.


btw if it takes 4.5 hours at 7:30 you need to change clubs!

PhilOssophy

GreeBo wrote: »

btw if it takes 4.5 hours at 7:30 you need to change clubs!

Beat me to it!!

paulanthony

GreeBo wrote: »

You cant compare "serious" golf with "casual" cycling and then say golf takes more time.

!

That's not really true. I know from previous threads that you basically like to nitpick with peoples points and try to argue the opposite to as many people as possible so I don't really care about the point enough to bother. I'm just posting my experience.

Thousands of men and women play competitions in clubs they are members of on a weekend morning. This is not some kind of elite participation, this is very standard practice. Most people work Monday to Friday and their club will run competitions on the weekend days, not casual rounds (certainly in the first halves of both days). The majority of regular golfers (who are a member somewhere) will play 90% of their golf on their home course and maybe a few green fees a year. Some will have regular playing partners, some will sign up to a tee time. But the deal you sign up to with playing competitions is to (a) pick an available time slot (b) be there at that time (c) play the round, however long that takes. That is pretty average participation and Is what I used to do when I was a member and I certainly wasn't overly "serious" about the game.

It's not accurate to say that the cycling equivalent of playing a stableford comp with a couple of pensioners (as it usually was in my case) is some kind of 200KM endurance cycle around the Wicklow mountains. Some people do that. Other people do a 90 minute spin around the roads in North County Dublin. Some people do both of those on different weekends. Some people start or finish in the dark. Some people start 30 minutes later than they planned because the baby's breakfast took longer than expected. I generally cycle with a friend who lives very nearby - and it's fine for one or other of us to delay starting by 15 mins with a quick text. Try that the morning of the Captain's Prize.

I'm not trying to say one is better than the other, to be honest I would much prefer to go out and play 18 every Saturday but that's not going to happen for me. But I also like cycling and generally do manage to get out at the weekends. I could maybe play 6 or 9 holes in the same time (in theory) but I would love to know where I can do this on Saturday mornings at 8am - member of a club or not (living in Dublin 2).

paulanthony

GreeBo wrote: »

btw if it takes 4.5 hours at 7:30 you need to change clubs!

It happens regularly - although the 4.5 hours in my post was from the time you are standing on the first tee to driving out the gate. So that is accounting for a little bit of time afterwards to change / shower / input your score etc.

Summer mornings, the 7:30 tee time might be the fifth group out and all it takes is a couple of slow guys in the first couple of slots to slow everything up. I'm a quick player but I have certainly experienced this (despite wishfully(/stupidly) thinking it will take 3.5 hours every time I go out for some reason).

GreeBo

paulanthony wrote: »

That's not really true.

Expect it is, one is a casual meetup, the other is a stipulated competition with rules and regulations and others involved.

paulanthony wrote: »

I know from previous threads that you basically like to nitpick with peoples points and try to argue the opposite to as many people as possible so I don't really care about the point enough to bother. I'm just posting my experience.

Indeed, and yet here you are still typing...
Its a discussion forum, if you are not happy with people having a different opinion than your own then I suggest you stop being involved rather than resorting to ad hominem attacks.
Btw you'll note that there are others who agree with me on this topic.

paulanthony wrote: »

Thousands of men and women play competitions in club they are members of on a weekend morning. This is not some kind of elite participation, this is very standard practice. Most people work Monday to Friday and their club will run competitions on the weekend days, not casual rounds. The majority of regular golfers (who are a member somewhere) will play 90% of their golf on their home course and maybe a few green fees a year. Some will have regular playing partners, some will sign up to a tee time. But the deal you sign up to with playing competitions is to (a) pick an available time slot (b) be there at that time (c) play the round, however long that takes. That is pretty average participation and Is what I used to do when I was a member and I certainly wasn't overly "serious" about the game.

Great, now please compare this to a cycling competition or its a moot point.
I might want to do a road race on a Monday morning because I'm a chef and I work weekends, pretty sure Im going to be sh1t out of luck though, right?

Playing competition is not pretty average participation, many, many people are not members of clubs any more and play causal/greenfee rounds of golf where ever they can get on whatever day/time they can get.

paulanthony wrote: »

It's not accurate to say that the cycling equivalent of playing a stableford comp with a couple of pensioners (as it usually was in my case) is some kind of 200KM endurance cycle around the Wicklow mountains. Some people do that. Other people do a 90 minute spin around the roads in North County Dublin. Some people do both of those on different weekends. Some people start or finish in the dark. Some people start 30 minutes later than they planned because the baby's breakfast took longer than expected. I generally cycle with a friend who lives very nearby - and it's fine for one or other of us to delay starting by 15 mins with a quick test. Try that the morning of the Captain's Prize.

Again you are comparing a casual cycle with a golf competition, try turning up for any cycle race late and see if they waited for you.
Also, you choose to play 18 holes, why not play 9 if time is your issue?

GreeBo

paulanthony wrote: »

It happens regularly - although the 4.5 hours in my post was from the time you are standing on the first tee to driving out the gate. So that is accounting for a little bit of time afterwards to change / shower / input your score etc.

Summer mornings, the 7:30 tee time might be the fifth group out and all it takes is a couple of slow guys in the first couple of slots to slow everything up. I'm a quick player but I have certainly experienced this (despite wishfully(/stupidly) thinking it will take 3.5 hours every time I go out for some reason).

Then your club has an issue, under 3 hours would be normal for 18 before 8am in my club.

Keano

New posters and old posters alike remember to attack the post and also leave the modding to the mods. Happy Friday all

Weepsie

GreeBo wrote: »

If you want to cycle "properly" then you also need to getup at 6:30 so that you can cycle the sally-gap and be back before lunch too...

You cant compare "serious" golf with "casual" cycling and then say golf takes more time.

I cycled Dublin to Galway once, I could have played 3 rounds of golf in the same timeframe, ergo cycling takes more effort.


btw if it takes 4.5 hours at 7:30 you need to change clubs!

I could leave my house at 9 (Northside of Dublin) cycle the length of the sally gap and be back at home by lunch. That's with probably above average fitness in fairness and assuming conditions are not too windy. Others could do it in less.

If I left at 6.30, I could possibly do the Military Road, Wicklow Gap and Sally Gap an get back for lunch.

Case in point being it very much depends on the player/cyclist, event, conditions etc.

I would frame it as, less time is wasted in the act of cycling than of golfing, because for golf you need to nearly always plan on getting to the course/clubhouse, setting up etc. Cycling, you can just shut your door and start.

magicbastarder

one thing to bear in mind in terms of pricing the cost of cycling vs. cost of golf is that sometimes the entry cost of cycling may itself be a saving, in certain circumstances.
my example: i bought a bike - a decent one secondhand - for €820 which only needed €15 spent on it to bring it to fully functioning use. that bike functioned not only as my 'leisure' bike, but also meant i was able to immediately save on the cost of my commute. add €300 for the various bits of clothing, helmet, lights etc., and i'm still looking at that being not much more than a grand. which is what i was spending per year on commuting.

i've put (i think) 16,000km on that bike in two or three years and it's still going strong. in terms of consumables on the bike - chains, brake pads, and a new cassette, it costs maybe €50-€80 a year.