Nowadays, many countries hope to use the international sports events to gain worldwide attention and reputation. In order to achieve this goal, they provide specialized equipment for training elite athletes rather than improving public access to fitness facilities. From my perspective, although this athlete-friendly policy brings some potential benefits, I assert that this is negative development which would lead to health problems and public discontent.
Admittedly, it is reasonable that some governments have strong incentives to build high-quality sports complexes exclusively used by professional athletes. To begin with, building specialized equipment not only creates a better training environment but also boosts a national image and pride if the athletes win international championships. In addition, this situation can increase patriotism among people, particularly when they see athletes from their own country holding the gold cup and waving the national flag. Also, athletes give younger generations a paradigm to emulate. For instance, Chinese children become more enthusiastic about basketball after Yao Ming wins the NBA playoffs. However, this benefits mentioned above does not necessarily mean that professional athletes should have the privilege of monopolizing national resources.
In fact, building specialized equipment only for top athletes contributes to obesity among people because there are no appropriate facilities for them to lose weight. According to the Human Health Organization, governments cannot downplay the role that sports facilities play in people’s health. This rationality is based on the fact that countries which do not provide sports equipment for every resident have a higher obesity rate than those which do. Worse still, the health organization alerts people to the downsides of obesity, stating that not only does obesity affect the appearance of people but it also compromises their health or even brings about some lethal diseases such as high blood pressure, cardiovascular diseases and cancer.
Second, this unfair policy that favors professional athletes sparks civil outrage because people think governments have abused the tax system. Seventy percent of people surveyed by Harvard University complain that most of the money they pay for their government is appropriated to build the sports facilities instead of being spent on other important sectors such as education, pension, healthcare and national defense, all of which are the very things people care about. In addition, thirty percent of the people even state that they would launch a campaign against the ineffectiveness of the government. In the long run, the public resentment eventually causes social unrest.
In conclusion, the idea of building sports facilities is undesirable because it has brought about too many problems to be considered a positive trend. Considering its negative effects on health and social order, the athlete-friendly plans should be canceled.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...tment eventually causes social unrest. In conclusion, the idea of building sports...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, second, so, thus, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 41.998997996 90% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1931.0 1615.20841683 120% => OK
No of words: 330.0 315.596192385 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.85151515152 5.12529762239 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26214759535 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08458205672 2.80592935109 110% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 176.041082164 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.648484848485 0.561755894193 115% => OK
syllable_count: 591.3 506.74238477 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.7122730731 49.4020404114 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.733333333 106.682146367 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 20.7667163134 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.06666666667 7.06120827912 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => 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: 0.252192846704 0.244688304435 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0699741587454 0.084324248473 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0491027587004 0.0667982634062 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.139514366762 0.151304729494 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0409116179612 0.056905535591 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.1 13.0946893788 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 50.2224549098 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.65 12.4159519038 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.61 8.58950901804 112% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 78.4519038076 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 9.78957915832 133% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => 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.