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?
The global success of some countries in sports can attribute to facilites harnessed to train famed sport players rather than public facilites for amateur users. This essay will elaborate on both side of the notion and explain why the role of sport equipment for everyone overshadows the position of investment for professtional players.
On the one hand, investment in for renowned sport players will enhance performance of individual sport professionals. The focus of resources for few standout athletes not only helps avoids unnecessarily scattering of capital for sport players but helps athletes pay attetion to enhance their performance. Additionally, by investing in one or two types of sport that nations have their edge on countries are able to reap various financial and cultural benefits. The success of Karate in Japan is a prime example. While the popularity of the sport enables the country to export coaching, training services to other nations, global Karate enthusiasts also admire and cherish Japanese culture which fosters the soft power of the sport’s motherland.
On the other hand, allocation in supplying equipment for the mass benefits the well-being of general population. It is not uncommon that public sport facilities become the mecca for local citizens who want to improve their phisiology or socialize with their neighbors. This helps raise the bar for the public health and weave the fabric of society, giving the local a sense of communal life. Another merit of equipping public sport facilities is that it stimulates public spending, sowing the seed for the development of economy. From economic perspective, the investment in purchase and maintenace of the facilities would require prodigious expenditure which creates employment opportunites and generate income for sport equipment manufacturers and service providers.
In sum, while specialized sport facilites converges the use of resources and popularizes national cuture, public sport equipment improves the well-fare of people and the economy. The position of public equipment in the long-term would be more beneficial for nations.
| 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 that staying in hotels is not a good option to know about a country or its people What do you think about this viewpoint 89
- Studying with a group of students in a classroom is more beneficial than learning online at home To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
- Every day millions of tons of food are wasted all over the world Why do you think this is happening And how can we solve this problem 84
- Some people say that the best way to improve public health is by increasing the number of sports facilities Others however say that this would have little effect on public health and that other measures are required Discuss both these views and give your 84
- The number of people interested in cosmetic surgery is increasing in order to improve their physical appearance Why do people do operations to change the way they look Do you think it is a positive or negative development 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, so, thus, well, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 13.1623246493 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 11.0 24.0651302605 46% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 8.3376753507 228% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1803.0 1615.20841683 112% => OK
No of words: 325.0 315.596192385 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.54769230769 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24591054749 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90626745716 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 176.041082164 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.563076923077 0.561755894193 100% => OK
syllable_count: 567.0 506.74238477 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.0766759019 49.4020404114 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.785714286 106.682146367 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2142857143 20.7667163134 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.92857142857 7.06120827912 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.19525270542 0.244688304435 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0693189361863 0.084324248473 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0444966724939 0.0667982634062 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123241993224 0.151304729494 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0295172336828 0.056905535591 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.21 12.4159519038 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.83 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.78957915832 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.