Some people think that governments should ban dangerous sports, while others think people should have freedom to do any sports or activities. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Many people argue that people should be banned from taking part in some dangerous sports or activities, while some believe that they should have the freedom to choose which sports they want to do. I firmly believe that the decision should lie with the players for several reasons.
On the one hand, there are various reasons explained why authorities should have strict regulations on sports majors, especially risky ones. The first reason relates to the injuries they have to go through after participating in adventure games. You suffer from long-lasting injuries, and even sustaining a lifelong injury is too high a price to pay for a brief adrenaline rush. For instance, if you have a broken bone, you find yourself challenged to move and do heavy jobs, and even your physical and mental health may degrade and weaken. Moreover, there are unpredictable risks such as equipment, and adverse conditions playing a vital role to ensure security and safety during exploration or racing.
On the other hand, I firmly advocate the idea that players should have the autonomy to partake in any sport. Firstly, all sports are potentially dangerous. For example, although it's safe games like jumping rope or badminton, you can get injured if you use the wrong technique. In addition, it is unreasonable when preventing them from pursuing their career, and passions. Because many people are keen on dangerous activities and find new sensations that give them the pleasure and excitement they crave.
In conclusion, while extreme sports are dangerous in some ways, I think that they can be beneficial to the players’ mental well-being
and thus should not be prohibited.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-03-11 | hieu13092006 | 56 | view |
- The pie charts below shows the online shopping sales for retail sectors in New Zealand in 2003 and 2013 80
- The maps below show the layouts of the nature Museum between 2010 and 2013 78
- The plans below show a public park when it first opened in 1920 and the same park today
- The plans below show a public park when it first opened in 1920 and the same park today 70
- The table and charts below give information on the police budget for 2017 and 2018 in one area of Britain The table shows where the money came from and the charts show how it was distributed 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, if, may, moreover, so, thus, well, while, for example, for instance, i think, in addition, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 41.998997996 64% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1396.0 1615.20841683 86% => OK
No of words: 272.0 315.596192385 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13235294118 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68787969073 2.80592935109 96% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 176.041082164 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.625 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 430.2 506.74238477 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.1267096532 49.4020404114 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.384615385 106.682146367 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9230769231 20.7667163134 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.3846153846 7.06120827912 161% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
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: 0.342689763656 0.244688304435 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0996054663503 0.084324248473 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.113316904815 0.0667982634062 170% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.181250454947 0.151304729494 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0992775005724 0.056905535591 174% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.0946893788 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 50.2224549098 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.4159519038 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 78.4519038076 89% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.