Nowadays, international sports games become a playing field for national sports industry to showcase the best personal talents and bring home honor and admiration. Some countries are willing to provide specialized facilities to train athletic skills, instead of providing fitness facilities for public use. While I think this is a positive development, it also has some drawbacks.
There are some advantages of/to building facilities specifically used for athletes. The immediate one is that professional athletes will indeed improve their skills. In order to defeat rivals and gain fame in international competitions, like the Olympic Games, countries need to guarantee that their athletes, even after gaining a lot of golden medals, could perform better in the future. It is natural and reasonable for those governments to fund their players and offer them better equipment and devices. Nevertheless, this does not necessarily imply that sportspeople should have the privilege of monopolizing the national resources.
In fact, the funds for this establishment come from government revenue, which is a collection of various forms. Therefore, it is unfair for taxpayers to pay for the things that they cannot use. In general, the true sportsmanship lies only in winning medals, but also in improving the physical condition of everyone. In addition, the careless use of the national revenue leads to deepening the public distrust of their government. People might be angry about the inadequate facilities they should be given access to, and see this flaw as the incompetence or betrayal of their government. In the long run, they might lose confidence in any of the government’s future policies.
In conclusion, the idea of building specialized facilities exclusively targeted at elite athletes cannot be supported because it has brought too many problems to be considered a positive trend. Some people take issue with my viewpoint because they think athletes should be given more welfare to ensure their professional development. However, this policy has negative impacts on the allocation of tax revenue and deepens public distrust on their government. Therefore, I would suggest that any plans of constructing facilities specifically used for athletes should be scrapped.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, nevertheless, so, therefore, while, i think, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, in general
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 24.0651302605 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1932.0 1615.20841683 120% => OK
No of words: 349.0 315.596192385 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.53581661891 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32221490584 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04370832912 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 206.0 176.041082164 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590257879656 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 603.0 506.74238477 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 16.0721442886 112% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.7539324966 49.4020404114 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.333333333 106.682146367 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3888888889 20.7667163134 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.44444444444 7.06120827912 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.272905647061 0.244688304435 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0819267362172 0.084324248473 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0928175131191 0.0667982634062 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.185687318487 0.151304729494 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.131156910048 0.056905535591 230% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.0946893788 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 50.2224549098 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.3001002004 105% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.85 12.4159519038 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.92 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 78.4519038076 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.