Read the claim. Golf is not a real sport. Read the counterclaim. Golf is a sport because it requires strength and coordination.
Read the rebuttal. People who play golf do some walking, but the US Supreme Court said that walking is not essential to playing golf. Which statement correctly analyzes the rebuttal? It is effective because it creates emphasis by restating the claim. It is effective because it uses a rhetorical device to appeal to logic. It is ineffective because it lacks strong supporting evidence. It is ineffective because it does not point out a flaw in the counterclaim.
The correct answer is number 4 "<em>it is ineffective because it does not point out a flaw in the counterclaim"</em>. The writer appeals to a negative opinion from a third party (US supreme court) to go against a factual argument. Strength and coordination are skills common to sports which could then define golf as one.
A better option for a counterclaim would address strength and coordination as non-essential for an activity to be considered a sport as is the case for the high striker game and chess, respectively.
The correct answer is: It is ineffective because it does not point out a flaw in the counterclaim.
A rebuttal should be a response to a counterclaim. Then, the rebuttal should explain why the counterclaim is incorrect. In doing so, it should include pieces of evidence with their sources supporting them.
In this case, the counterclaim states that golf is a sport which requires certain physical skills. Whereas the rebuttal refers only to the fact that golf requires some walking and intends to present the US Supreme Court as a supporting source but the statement completely misses the point.
