Some countries achieve international success by building specialized facilities to train top athletes instead of providing sports facilities that everyone can use. Do you think it is a positive or negative development？
It is true that some governments gain worldwide reputation on sport players’ excellent performance, and therefore they invest much money on training the athletes. I completely disagree with the opinion because I believe that authority’s major responsibility is to take care of citizens, and also put the residents in the country as first priority.
There are various reasons that servants in government should not continue to allocate money on players. Firstly, it is waste of money if the athletes lose the competitions in unexpected situations or if the races put off due to disasters or disease breaking out. For example, COVID-19 causes the Olympics sport competition in Japan not to hold in this year. Secondly, the expenditure on the facilities uses much government’s resource. The trainers need to prepare professional equipment and special fabric clothes, whereas many of them are tailor and not easy to get. Finally, some kinds of these glorious action would be used by politicians to show off.
If instead of spending money on specific person government should take action to make welfare to everyone, I believe that consequences will be more profitable. Building parks next to the river and constructing gyms in the communities are cheaper than that spending on specialized facilities on professional people. Moreover, the equipment for normal people are ready-made, there is no need to make effort to find. Besides, the facilities everyone can use can actually prompt the health of citizens, and bring them happy lives. With pleasurable people in the country, it can indeed promote our images in that way.
In conclusion, many countries and governments invest found on train players on races to win reputation worldwide, but I believe that constructing everyone can use would please residents and also facilitate the positive development.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, besides, but, finally, first, firstly, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, whereas, for example, in conclusion, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1575.0 1615.20841683 98% => OK
No of words: 293.0 315.596192385 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.37542662116 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13729897018 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03143151796 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 176.041082164 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590443686007 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 490.5 506.74238477 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.6769214733 49.4020404114 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.5 106.682146367 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9285714286 20.7667163134 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.6428571429 7.06120827912 151% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.2071645014 0.244688304435 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0619354386428 0.084324248473 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0552488176147 0.0667982634062 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116255898218 0.151304729494 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0323231605446 0.056905535591 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.0946893788 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.4159519038 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.1 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 78.4519038076 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.