Sports funding for top athletes: IELTS Task 2 essay #1, band 7.0

As we approach a world of changing social norms and behaviors, the question of whether governments should spend money on sports facilities for top athletes, or whether others believe that this investment should be directed towards sports facilities for ordinary members of the society has gained widespread attention, particularly in developing nations. While supporting athletes can enhance national pride by representing home countries, I believe that providing these opportunities for the public can yield more long-term benefits.

1. Lexical resource

   Close revision note

   RevisedWhile supporting athletes can boost national pride through their representation of the home country, I believe that extending these opportunities to the public can provide greater long-term benefits.

   The revised sentence provides a more clear and direct statement of the contrasting views.

Admittedly, proponents of supporting successful athletes financially have many strong arguments to support their stance. Once governments support athletes such as football, tennis and chess players by constructing training zones, experienced coaches and advanced equipment, they tend to participate in national competitions such as the Olympics and World Cups that take place annually or every four years. As a result, these sportspeople often represent their own countries, showing their culture, history and modern life to the world which help countries become more renowned. That is, they can increase tourist numbers which plays an important role in generating income.

1. Coherence & cohesion

   Close revision note

   RevisedAdmittedly, proponents of providing financial support to successful athletes have several compelling arguments.

   The revised sentence is more concise and easier to understand.

2. Lexical resource

   Close revision note

   RevisedThis, in turn, can lead to an increase in tourist numbers, which plays an important role in generating income.

   The revised sentence provides a more clear and direct cause-effect relationship.

Despite these benefits, I think governments should support local people. By allocating a large amount of money to sports facilities such as constructing fitness areas, gyms, community centers and organizing public outreach initiatives, people are encouraged to take regular exercise more seriously. This can lower the risk of some serios health issues such as heart attacks, high level blood pressure, and insomnia, ultimately creating a safe and healthy environment to live in. Consequently, it may relieve the growing pressure on the healthcare system due to the increasing number of illnesses. Moreover, some athletes are already financially successful which means that they could easily afford basic expenses of sports tools and other needs, meaning that prioritizing them for government funding may be less beneficial than investing in public facilities.

1. Coherence & cohesion

   Close revision note

   RevisedDespite the benefits of supporting top athletes, I believe that governments should prioritize the needs of the local population.

   The revised sentence provides a clearer transition to the writer's point of view.

2. Lexical resource

   Close revision note

   RevisedMoreover, some athletes are already financially successful, which means that they can afford the basic expenses of sports equipment and other needs. Therefore, prioritizing them for government funding may be less beneficial than investing in public facilities.

   The revised sentence is more clear and easier to understand.

In conclusion, although investing income for top athletes helps boost national pride, I acknowledge that public health is far more important. So, instead of supporting top athletes who can afford some of their expenses, governments should focus on more the development of local sports facilities.

1. Coherence & cohesion

   Close revision note

   RevisedIn conclusion, while investing in top athletes can enhance national pride, I believe that the primary focus should be on public health.

   The revised sentence provides a clearer and more concise summary of the writer's position.