Do you agree or that improvements in technology reduce the role of Olympic Games.
Olympic Games are the world's most important international athletic competition. They bring together thousands of the finest athletes to compete against one another in a variety of individual and team sports. Although technology is having an impact on the Olympics in a profound way I disagree that it is reducing the role of Olympic Games. I believe that technology allows us to more fully appreciate everything about the competition and the athletes who commit their lives to fulfil their dreams.
To begin with, winning an Olympic event is the highest honour people can achieve even in the modern times. Unknown athletes get the chance to attain national, and in particular cases, international fame. Secondly, Olympic Games are the best medium of cultural exchange even today. Different people of different countries, religions, cultures etc get together at Olympics and the participants get a chance to know about other cultures. The Games also constitute a major opportunity for the host city and country to showcase themselves to the world.
Although the technological realities of the modern times have brought many changes in the Olympic Games of today, they have not reduced the importance of the Olympic Games. Technology plays a part in every aspect of these games, from the first torch relay hand-off to the closing ceremonies. Athletes and trainers use technology in preparing for the games to optimize their training. Sports equipment manufacturers use design technology to build improved apparatus, gear and more that will enable their clients to deliver a high level performance. Broadcasters use technology to better inform viewers of all aspects of the events. As a consequence, more and more people are exposed to these games.
People who opine that technology has reduced the role of Olympic Games say so because the ugly claws of commercialism have crept into this field also. As a result, the Olympics has shifted away from pure amateurism to professionalism. The win-at-all-cost attitude has come up and many use unethical means to win. They also say that only the rich can afford technology to boost their performance and this creates a gap between the rich and poor. I still believe that without inherent ability no amount of technology can make anybody a winner or loser.
To put it in a nutshell, I pen down saying that, technology has brought colossal changes in The Olympic Games of today but in no way have they decreased the role of Olympic Games.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 209, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Although” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... variety of individual and team sports. Although technology is having an impact on the O...
^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 265, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a profound way" with adverb for "profound"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...ogy is having an impact on the Olympics in a profound way I disagree that it is reducing the role...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 146, Rule ID: ALSO_SENT_END[1]
Message: 'Also' is not used at the end of the sentence. Use 'as well' instead.
Suggestion: as well
...ommercialism have crept into this field also. As a result, the Olympics has shifted ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, second, secondly, so, still, in particular, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 13.1623246493 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 41.998997996 145% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2077.0 1615.20841683 129% => OK
No of words: 406.0 315.596192385 129% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1157635468 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48881294772 4.20363070211 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83419204853 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 176.041082164 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536945812808 0.561755894193 96% => OK
syllable_count: 675.9 506.74238477 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 16.0721442886 131% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.2098366727 49.4020404114 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.9047619048 106.682146367 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3333333333 20.7667163134 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.38095238095 7.06120827912 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.67935871743 161% => 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: 0.302615651262 0.244688304435 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0882525160699 0.084324248473 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0828746466341 0.0667982634062 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180071549217 0.151304729494 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0425108522594 0.056905535591 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.0946893788 95% => Automated_readability_index is low.
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: 12.42 12.4159519038 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.74 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 78.4519038076 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.