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?
t is observed that global prestige is achieved by constructing specific premises to upskill elite athletes in lieu of offering sports facilities for public use in some parts of the world. I believe that this has detrimental impacts on citizens, despite the fact that it can create favourite conditions for athletes to prosper.
On the one hand, the erection of specialized facilities for training talented athletes can facilitate their capacities. This is because outstanding sportspeople can be given better chances to further improve themselves, enabling them to maximise their potential. Therefore, they can give optimal performances in global competitions and are more likely to achieve rewards and success in sports, making great contributions to national achievements in this field. For instance, the Vietnamese government provided funds to establish football institutions such as Hoang Anh Gia Lai to train and support children who have an innate ability. As a result, numerous young talented football players such as Xuan Truong and Tuan Anh were trained intensively and excelled in football matches, enhancing the position of Vietnam in international sports.
On the other hand, this propensity can induce two noticeable drawbacks. Chief of these is that it adversely affects public health. More specifically, as the state budget is spent on building facilities for training top athletes in lieu of providing community sports facilities, there would be a shortage of open areas such as parks, gardens and squares which offer an abundance of resources for free exercise. Consequently, fewer places are offered for residents to exercise, potentially encouraging a sedentary lifestyle in the community and weakening citizens’ well-being. Another drawback is that it can trigger great dissatisfaction among citizens. As they pay taxes to enrich the government budget they may argue they deserve to receive free fitness equipment and spaces, and may feel discontent if the state funding is allocated to serve a small number of recipients only.
In conclusion, although investing in specialized facilities for professional sports people only can enhance their performances and improve a nation’s standing, I maintain that its consequences including deteriorating public health and generating dissatisfaction among individuals in society are more significant.
| 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 |
- Video records are a better way to learn about the way other people in the world live rather than written documents To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
- 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 78
- 1 Technology causes more problems for modern society than it solves Do you agree or disagree 73
- Some people believe that success in sports depends on physical ability Others believe that there are more important factors Discuss both views and give your own opinion 78
- 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 95
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: T
t is observed that global prestige is ach...
^
Line 5, column 845, Rule ID: SMALL_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, use 'a few', or use 'some'
Suggestion: a few; some
...the state funding is allocated to serve a small number of recipients only. In conclusion, alth...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, if, may, so, therefore, well, for instance, in conclusion, such as, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2021.0 1615.20841683 125% => OK
No of words: 354.0 315.596192385 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.70903954802 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33761313653 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.16568877687 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 176.041082164 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.618644067797 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 626.4 506.74238477 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.2975951904 123% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 72.1894121356 49.4020404114 146% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.357142857 106.682146367 135% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2857142857 20.7667163134 122% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.35714285714 7.06120827912 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => 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: 0.235515163833 0.244688304435 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0714207135917 0.084324248473 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0640173720942 0.0667982634062 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.137620657073 0.151304729494 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0425934729186 0.056905535591 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.1 13.0946893788 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.18 50.2224549098 58% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.3001002004 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.13 12.4159519038 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.27 8.58950901804 120% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 78.4519038076 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.1190380762 119% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.