The author's conclusion from his premises and his assumptions are rife with inaccuracies and fallacies, which can be used to weaken his argument.
The author states that the Dallas Cowboys (the Cowboys) have won 17 out of 21 games over the last 5 seasons, but has not mentioned if these wins are for every season or for a total of 5 seasons. If the wins are for a total of 5 seasons, then the win ratio is not very impressive and does not warrant the author's assumption that they will win the full season this year. Additionally, the author has not mentioned how many games make up a season; if the number of games in a season are far more than 21, such as 40 to 50 games, then the win ratio of 17:21 is not satisfactory and certainly is not enough to validate the author's assumptions of the Cowboys team's winning capacity.
The author's conclusion, that given the track record of the Cowboys team over the last 5 seasons, they are sure to win this full season is a logical fallacy, known as 'The Hot Hand Fallacy' in basketball. Just because the team may have shown a good record over the last few seasons, it does not necessarily mean that the team would do better this year. There may be several factors which worked in the team's favour to get the wins, such as a good coach, a good strategist who came up with impressive plays to confound the other teams, good players who could be trusted to carry the play successfully, etc. Also, the author seems to assume that the Washington Redskins (the Redskins) is the only other team of the same calibre as the Cowboys team, whereas there could be many other teams playing for the win too. New teams could have entered which show great promise, as well as old teams revamping themselves to beat the Cowboys team.
Also, the author assumes that a good win record over only 5 seasons is enough to convince anyone that the Cowboys team would make a clean sweep of this season. However, we have no information of their track record in earlier seasons. It is possible that the team got a new coach, new manager, new players which propelled them to success in the last 5 seasons and if some of them have left the team this season, it is certainly possible that the team is weakened and may not win against Redskins or the other teams.
Hence, we observe that evidence that the author has provided for supporting his claim that the Cowboys team would make a clean sweep of this season, based on them winning 17 out of 21 games against Redskins over the last 5 seasons, is not sufficient to validate his claims, and needs to be reexamined. Further specific details are needed in order to make a convincing case for the author's argument.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 489 350
No. of Characters: 2142 1500
No. of Different Words: 195 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.702 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.38 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.295 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 127 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 95 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 51 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 28 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 37.615 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 19.198 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.769 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.431 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.669 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.204 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 5, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
The authors conclusion from his premises and his as...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 304, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ery impressive and does not warrant the authors assumption that they will win the full ...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...f the Cowboys teams winning capacity. The authors conclusion, that giv...
^^^
Line 5, column 13, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...eams winning capacity. The authors conclusion, that given the track record...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... themselves to beat the Cowboys team. Also, the author assumes that a ...
^^^
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n against Redskins or the other teams. Hence, we observe that evidence ...
^^^
Line 9, column 390, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...order to make a convincing case for the authors argument.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, may, so, then, well, whereas, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 28.8173652695 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 55.5748502994 83% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 16.3942115768 30% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2196.0 2260.96107784 97% => OK
No of words: 488.0 441.139720559 111% => OK
Chars per words: 4.5 5.12650576532 88% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70007681154 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.36486419041 2.78398813304 85% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 204.123752495 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.415983606557 0.468620217663 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 651.6 705.55239521 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.59920159681 81% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => 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: 34.0 22.8473053892 149% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 71.0155200054 57.8364921388 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 156.857142857 119.503703932 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 34.8571428571 23.324526521 149% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.71428571429 5.70786347227 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.316323449859 0.218282227539 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.126928752739 0.0743258471296 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101162187324 0.0701772020484 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180969462666 0.128457276422 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.103245637046 0.0628817314937 164% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.2 14.3799401198 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 62.35 48.3550499002 129% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.41 12.5979740519 75% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.65 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 98.500998004 73% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 15.6 11.1389221557 140% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.