Task 2: Some countries achieve international success by building specialised facilities to train top athletes instead of providing sports facilities that everyone can use. Is it a positive or negative development?
In the modern age, many individuals would advocate that constructing specialized amenities for professional sportspeople is more favourable than public provision of sport facilities. In my personal perspective, this is a negative measure towards society and the reasons behind it will be stated in upcoming paragraphs.
On the one hand, it is undeniable that focusing only on the improvement of athletes can bring about several advantages. The first worth-mentioning fact perhaps is that this will boost the performance of our athletes and increase their competency. As a consequence, it can lead to many victories and triumphs at national athletic competitions such as the Olympics. In addition, the government can also save time and effort regards to providing basic trainings for amateur sportspeople. For instance, if an athelete is already proficient at ground-based techniques in swimming, it will take less hours and resources to train them at intensive courses for competition.
On the other hand, equipping everybody with sports tools when needed is extremely crucial. Sports play a critical in our lives which affect our ability to learn and work more effectively. If every citizens have the right to practice sports in public places, it can increase our national health performance and thus, a more powerful work force and thriving economy. Furthermore, giving everyone the access to sports amenities can result in detecting many hidden talents which are likely to become successful athletes in the future. By contrast, if a person with excellent potential in sports but is unable to play sports due to the lack of facilities, he can not be discovered. This will be an enormous loss for society.
In conclusion, while numerous nations are achieving success by providing exclusive sports tools for existing athletes, I belive that opening sports facilities to the public would be a more beneficial option.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 590, Rule ID: LESS_DOLLARSMINUTESHOURS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer hours'?
Suggestion: fewer hours
...ed techniques in swimming, it will take less hours and resources to train them at intensiv...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 590, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun hours is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...ed techniques in swimming, it will take less hours and resources to train them at in...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, if, so, thus, while, for instance, 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 : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1626.0 1615.20841683 101% => OK
No of words: 301.0 315.596192385 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.40199335548 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16525528304 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06570541391 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.604651162791 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 510.3 506.74238477 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.4358459372 49.4020404114 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.142857143 106.682146367 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5 20.7667163134 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.57142857143 7.06120827912 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.181232749908 0.244688304435 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0582923212153 0.084324248473 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0467839170339 0.0667982634062 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.107880698135 0.151304729494 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0485995132785 0.056905535591 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 13.0946893788 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.04 12.4159519038 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.56 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 78.4519038076 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.