Some countries achieve international success by building specialized facilities to train top athletes instead of providing sports facilities that everyone can use. Is it a positive or negative development?
It is true that in some countries, they build exclusive training facilities for elite athletes, rather than investing in sports facilities that are accessible to the general public. While I believe that this approach may lead to greater international success in sports, it also poses some negative aspects.
On the one hand, customized infrastructures for top athletes can have many positive effects. This development can give a country's athletes a competitive edge and enhance their chances of winning medals and championships. For example, a country with a world-class high-altitude training center may have an advantage in endurance sports such as distance running and cycling. Additionally, investing in top athletes can raise the profile of a country and bring international recognition, which can have positive effects on tourism and the economy. Furthermore, supporting top athletes can inspire and motivate younger generations to pursue sports, leading to a healthier and more active society.
On the other hand, there are also potential downsides , particularly for those who are not top sporstmen. Firstly, it can lead to unequal access to sports facilities, which can perpetuate social inequalities. If resources are only directed towards top-tier athletes, other members of society may be excluded from sports and physical activity. Secondly, it can lead to a narrow focus on certain sports, which can limit the diversity of sports available and prevent the development of athletes in other areas. By focusing exclusively on training sports aces, a country may overlook the importance of promoting physical activity and sports participation among the general population. This could have negative consequences for public health, as well as for the development of grass-roots sports programs that could identify and nurture future top athletes.
In conclusion, while the emphasis on the development of facilities for top athletes can lead to be global achievements in sports and bring recognition to a country, it is a negative development if it neglects the needs of the wider population and promotes elitism in sports.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-01-18 | honguyenlily | 84 | view |
| 2023-11-06 | thaokim2003 | 61 | view |
| 2023-11-02 | tracywu | 73 | view |
| 2023-10-23 | Giang Tran | 67 | view |
| 2023-10-03 | Cuberates | 73 | view |
- Some people think young people should follow the traditions of their society Others think that they should be free to behave as individuals Discuss both views and give your opinion 73
- Some people think young people should follow the traditions of their society Others think that they should be free to behave as individuals Discuss both views and give your opinion 61
- Some people think young people should follow the traditions of their society Others think that they should be free to behave as individuals Discuss both views and give your opinion 61
- Some people believe that certain old buildings should be preserved more than others What types of old buildings should be preserved Do you think the advantages of preserving old buildings outweigh the disadvantages 78
- Some countries achieve international success by building specialized facilities to train top athletes instead of providing sports facilities that everyone can use Is it a positive or negative development 61
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 167, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...s facilities that are accessible to the general public. While I believe that this approach may...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 54, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...hand, there are also potential downsides , particularly for those who are not top ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, furthermore, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, well, while, as for, for example, in conclusion, such as, as well as, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 7.85571142285 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1806.0 1615.20841683 112% => OK
No of words: 327.0 315.596192385 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.52293577982 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25242769721 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12345143071 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.535168195719 0.561755894193 95% => OK
syllable_count: 574.2 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.9821392321 49.4020404114 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.0 106.682146367 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3571428571 20.7667163134 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.2142857143 7.06120827912 173% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.370814393657 0.244688304435 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124986535611 0.084324248473 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0611724477428 0.0667982634062 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.236873193542 0.151304729494 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0288727257726 0.056905535591 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 50.2224549098 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 12.4159519038 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.9 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 78.4519038076 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 167, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...s facilities that are accessible to the general public. While I believe that this approach may...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 54, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...hand, there are also potential downsides , particularly for those who are not top ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, furthermore, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, well, while, as for, for example, in conclusion, such as, as well as, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 7.85571142285 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1806.0 1615.20841683 112% => OK
No of words: 327.0 315.596192385 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.52293577982 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25242769721 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12345143071 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.535168195719 0.561755894193 95% => OK
syllable_count: 574.2 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.9821392321 49.4020404114 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.0 106.682146367 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3571428571 20.7667163134 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.2142857143 7.06120827912 173% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.370814393657 0.244688304435 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124986535611 0.084324248473 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0611724477428 0.0667982634062 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.236873193542 0.151304729494 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0288727257726 0.056905535591 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 50.2224549098 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 12.4159519038 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.9 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 78.4519038076 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.