When people succeed, it is because of hard work. Luck has nothing to do with success. Do you agree or disagree with the quotation above? Use specific reasons and examples to explain your position.
A.I. Score
Each colour is one skill. Tap a colour to hide it. Tap it again to show it.
The quotation claims that success results solely from hard work and excludes any role for luck. I disagree with this absolute view. While sustained effort and discipline are essential foundations of achievement, favourable circumstances and chance opportunities often interact with hard work to determine final outcomes.
Hard work is undeniably central because it builds skills, resilience, and consistency. Individuals who practise deliberately, manage their time effectively, and persist despite setbacks are more likely to reach high levels of performance. For example, a student who studies systematically and seeks feedback usually attains stronger academic results than one who relies on talent alone. Effort also increases readiness, meaning that people are capable of recognising and using opportunities when they arise. Without preparation, chance events rarely translate into lasting success.
However, denying the influence of luck ignores social, economic, and situational factors that individuals do not control. Access to quality education, supportive networks, or being noticed at a critical moment can accelerate progress significantly. Two equally hardworking entrepreneurs may experience very different outcomes if one encounters an investor at the right time while the other faces an economic downturn. In such cases, success reflects not only effort but also timing and external conditions that shape possibilities.
In conclusion, success is best understood as the result of hard work combined with elements of luck. Effort creates the capacity to succeed, but chance often determines the speed, scale, and direction of achievement. Ignoring either factor presents an incomplete and unrealistic explanation of success.
- Fully addresses the prompt in depth, showing full command of the argument by reformulating the issue in the writer's own words and expanding important points with specificity.
- The argument is supported convincingly with subsidiary points and relevant examples throughout the response.
- Has an effective logical structure, flows smoothly, and can be followed with ease.
- The argument is clear and cohesive and developed systematically at length; a well-developed introduction and conclusion are present, and ideas are organised cohesively into clear, logically sequenced paragraphs.
- Uses a variety of connective devices effectively and consistently to convey relationships between ideas.
- A variety of expressions and vocabulary are used appropriately to formulate ideas with ease and precision throughout the response.
- No signs of limitations restricting what can be communicated.
- Errors in language use, if present, are rare and minor, and meaning is completely clear.
- Shows consistent grammatical control of complex language. Errors are rare and difficult to spot.
- Good command of a broad lexical repertoire, idiomatic expressions and collocations.
- Correct spelling.
- Length is within the required 200 to 300 words.