Some people think that physical strength is important for success in sport, while other people think that mental strength is more important. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Without a shadow of a doubt, with afoot progression and augmentation of science, human beings are facing miscellaneous methods in the improvement of the sport. One of the polemical items is nothing but the employment of psychics in sport, i.e., the boost of thinking. Notwithstanding, some are of the opinion that in sport, we just need to enhance the corporeal puissance of athletes. Others aver that leaders have to prepare exercisers from the standpoint of cerebral. We discuss both facets, and my credence will be set in the following.
On the one hand, those who are the proponent of the former notion strongly declare that physical strength outweighs mental one. First and foremost, if a person is going to do exercise, they have to be physically ready, otherwise they not merely impair themselves but also deteriorate the fortitude of their team. For example, the results acquired by a team from the University of MIT obviously suggest that to win a match, having a team with high physical strength plays a crucial role. Moreover, the more the corporeal strength is, the longer time the athletes can play.
Meanwhile, those who are the advocators of the latter idea put forward that mentally preparing the athletes is an integral part of the sport. Firstly, when they become mentally ready, their spatial cognition considerably improves, intuitively giving rise to vying with their opponents successfully. To the best of the author's knowledge, Dr. Alex, who is one of the best managers and trailblazers in the field of sport, coerces their players to downright muse about the next match. Furthermore, should a person contemplates the forthcoming competition, under no condition will they not be overwhelmed by stress and strain.
To briefly recapitulate, I wholeheartedly go for the latter credence. By the way, the essay can be boiled down to two items: (1) being physically ready is so kernel for players thanks to being an efficacious team player and to not healthy jeopardizing themselves, (2) it is a desideratum to be mentally ready because of having spatial cognizant in the field and veering away from the stress.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-28 | Phuong1810 | 89 | view |
| 2023-08-02 | Shinycorn122 | 56 | view |
| 2023-07-27 | mike123 | 73 | view |
| 2023-07-24 | Đặng Quỳnh Như | 73 | view |
| 2023-07-22 | Zeroplague0407 | 73 | view |
- Some say that people working in different job roles should get different amounts of holiday time. Do you agree or disagree? Give your opinion and examples from your own experience. 100
- The graph shows the monthly expenditure on three types of restaurant food in Australia The plot shows the annual number of restaurant visits for the same types of food between 1965 and 2015 100
- Parents should be held legally responsible for their children’s acts. What is your opinion? Support it with personal examples. 73
- Some observers say that police officer should be recruited from the communities where they work so that they have local knowledge Other people say that this is unnecessary or even undesirable Where do you stand on this debate Is local knowledge essential 78
- The table below shows the numbers of visitors to Ashdown Museum during the year before and the year after it was refurbished The charts show the result of surveys asking visitors who satisfied they were with their visit during the same two periods 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 319, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...onents successfully. To the best of the authors knowledge, Dr. Alex, who is one of the ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, briefly, but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, moreover, so, while, for example, by the way
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 41.998997996 121% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1786.0 1615.20841683 111% => OK
No of words: 350.0 315.596192385 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10285714286 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32530772707 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96966431141 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 176.041082164 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.58 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 537.3 506.74238477 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.4636162406 49.4020404114 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.066666667 106.682146367 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3333333333 20.7667163134 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.46666666667 7.06120827912 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.143344374099 0.244688304435 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0472834087097 0.084324248473 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0294029302578 0.0667982634062 44% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0812955609163 0.151304729494 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0333846393024 0.056905535591 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.0946893788 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 50.2224549098 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.6 12.4159519038 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.58950901804 107% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 78.4519038076 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.