Some countries achieve international success by building specialised facilities to train top athletes instead of providing sports facilities that everyone can use. Is it a positive or negative development?
Nowadays, in order to attain international success, some nations have decided to erect specialised infrastructures for the purpose of training athletes those who have sports aptitudes. Although it is better and essential for the authorities to implement this policy, I would hold that this tendency may be flood with a lot of pitfalls.
On the one hand, there are some factors prevailing me on believing that this trend could be favorable in some facets. Firstly, if high-level athletes are provided enough sports equipments, they can promote their abilities. In Vietnam, for instance, the government have built a great number of specialised stadiums to create opportunities for skillful football players like Nguyen Tien Linh or Hoang Duc to improve and dedicate their talents. Therefore, Vietnamese football is capable of thriving strongly and comparing with other reputative football teams. Furthermore, thanks to the establishment of specialised clubs, plenty of children those who are considered to have sports talents are honed to be ingenious athletes in the future. Without these specialised groups, a great number of athletes like Nguyen Cong Phuong would not have been found.
On the other hand, some justifications are attributed to be the motivations for me to opine that this trend may have some repercussions on society. The first argument is that if specialised amenities are only provided for well-trained athletes, inhabitants cannot get access to sports equipments to practise or to work out. Thus, innumerable individuals would face with the likelihood of contracting serious illnesses such as obesity or cardiovascular diseases since they do not do exercises. Ultimately, the health of community might decline. Moreover, without the specialised facilities supplied, a lot of people cannot realise their innate sports aptitudes. Consequently, there would be a shortage of elit athletes in times to come.
In conclusion, apparently, it cannot be denied that this tendency could bring about benefits for the development of national sports teams; However, I want to affirm that it may be crucial for the supply of specialised amenities for the community to be taken into account.
| 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 |
- Nowadays people waste a lot of food that was bought from shops and restaurants Why do you think people waste food What can reduce to reduce the amount of food they throw away 61
- The graph below shows the hours of teaching per year done by each teacher in four different countries in 2001 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 61
- The graph below shows the number of overseas visitors to three different areas in a European country between 1987 and 2007 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 56
- Some countries achieve international success by building specialised facilities to train top athletes instead of providing sports facilities that everyone can use Is it a positive or negative development 73
- Rich countries often give money to poorer countries but it does not solve poverty Therefore developed countries should give other types of help to poorer countries rather than financial aid To what extent do you agree or disagree 56
Transition Words or Phrases used:
apparently, but, consequently, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, so, therefore, thus, well, for instance, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 7.85571142285 178% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 41.998997996 119% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.3376753507 72% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1861.0 1615.20841683 115% => OK
No of words: 340.0 315.596192385 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.47352941176 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29407602571 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07941457385 2.80592935109 110% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 176.041082164 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.555882352941 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 580.5 506.74238477 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.667723567 49.4020404114 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.066666667 106.682146367 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6666666667 20.7667163134 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.3333333333 7.06120827912 161% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.176812867139 0.244688304435 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0607378069395 0.084324248473 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0545530951637 0.0667982634062 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.108551307121 0.151304729494 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0343514352946 0.056905535591 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 13.0946893788 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.74 12.4159519038 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.37 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 78.4519038076 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => 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.