Differences Between Tokyo and Kyoto In recent decades, the title of one of the most popular cultures worldwide should be definitely given to Japan. Millions of people all over the world study the Japanese language, watch dorama(dramatic TV series on all kinds of topics) or animation, read and write haiku, and make pen pals with Japanese people. Countless people buy tickets and fly to the country of the rising sun to see its wonders with their own eyes. Among the most popular destinations—mostly because these city names are most known to the western public—are Tokyo and Kyoto. And perhaps for an inexperienced traveler, there is a dilemma: where to go? Mostly, people know that Tokyo is a mega city of the future, and Kyoto has more to do with ancient culture, traditions, and so on. Basically it is true, but at the same time, there also exist more subtle differences one should consider when choosing their destination point in Japan. The first of them is prices. Tokyo is expensive—as you might expect from the capital of the most urbanized country in the world (the prices below are listed in Japanese yen: 1 USD approximately equals 100 yen). So, to grab some inexpensive snack in Tokyo would cost around 850 yen. Having a three-course meal for two people in a mid-range restaurant, in case you travel with your spouse, will cost you 5,230 yen. A one-way ticket on Tokyo transport costs you 190 yen, and renting one room apartment outside of the city center costs 77,853 yen (and this is probably a weekly price). Just do not expect this apartment to be big and cozy; most likely it will be tiny, with basic utilities, and with no central heating (actually, there is no such thing in Japan at all—everyone warms their house up on their own). If you think of buying an apartment in Tokyo, forget it—one square meter of a room outside of the city center is around 1 million yen (double the price if you want to live closer to the city center). Kyoto is not much cheaper. Although dining in a restaurant is cheaper—only 4,000 yen for two persons in a mid-range restaurant—transportation costs are surprisingly higher: 235 yen for a ride (however, if you want to purchase a monthly pass, it is cheaper to do in Kyoto rather than in Tokyo: 8,410 yen compared to 10,000 yen). If you think you can save some money buying food in a market, you are correct only in particulars: some products in Japan cost a lot of money no matter where you buy them. For example, white rice costs 850 yen for 1 kg in Kyoto (453 yen in Tokyo). White bread, tomatoes, chicken breasts, and especially cheese—these are the most expensive products both in Kyoto and in Tokyo. Speaking of accommodation, renting or buying an apartment in Kyoto is much cheaper: for a one room apartment outside of Kyoto’s center, you must pay 48,000 yen to rent, or 300,000 yen per square meter if you want to buy it (Numbeo.com). It is difficult to say which city is better for an inexperienced tourist to visit, Tokyo or Kyoto. Kyoto is cheaper, especially in terms of renting an apartment, and is more suitable for those looking for the old Japanese culture weaved into sophisticated palaces made during Heianjidai. Tokyo, on the contrary, is an enormous metropolis, with crazy prices, crazy transportation, crazy everything. The atmospheres are different, but both of the cities will make you awed, so if you have a chance, you should definitely visit them. Comparison Essay Structure Alternating pattern Alternating pattern is also known as "point-by-point comparison". This mode of comparison will result in your essay having 5 paragraphs. Alternating pattern is also known as "point-by-point comparison". This mode of comparison will result in your essay having 5 paragraphs. In it, you will need to consecutively compare and contrast each of the similarities and differences in the given subjects: In the introduction you state your thesis. Then you discuss both of your subjects together for each point of comparison and contrast. In the conclusion you restate the thesis and shortly summarize your essay. Block pattern Block pattern is also known as "subject-by-subject comparison". According to this pattern, you will be required to separate the body of your compare and contrast essay in two parts. The first part of the body will be dedicated to the first subject, while the other half will be centered around the second subject: In the introduction you state your thesis. First you discuss the first subject. Then you discuss the second subject. In the conclusion you restate the thesis and shortly summarize your essay. Forward or Defender: Which Soccer Position Contributes More to a Win? Soccer is a fascinating sport for a myriad reasons: it has changing speeds, dynamics in the variety of player positions, and a hint of unpredictability where a twist of fate can turn the game around. Soccer is no doubt a team game—one can seldom score a goal by dribbling the ball across the field and getting it across the goal line alone. Every player contributes to the overall result—even those players sitting on the substitute bench can contribute to the general winning spirit of their team. Yet, despite the undoubted fact that soccer is a team game, there has consistently been the argument as to who contributes more to a win, and thus, which role is to be considered more valuable: is it the defender or the forward players? I believe it is incorrect to consider choosing between these two positions. To prove my point, it will be instructive to compare the two roles in detail. The forward position is no doubt both exciting and fascinating. It is no secret that forward players are commonly the most popular names in the world of soccer, and are also usually sold to clubs at a much higher rate than players in any other position. After all, it is a forward in most cases who scores that longed-for goal and makes the whole stadium chant their name. Forwards also most often earn free kicks and penalties for their team by forcing the opposing player to commit a foul to stop the marauding striker from getting the ball across the goal line (Winston, Soccer’s Reality). Forwards are the most widely recognized, that even non-fans can identify them by face and name. Soccer fans themselves will, in the majority of cases, agree that forwards are the players who deserves, on-and-off the field, more than any other. However, there have been millions of soccer games where even the world’s top-ranked strikers have failed to score a goal because they seldom had the ball in their possession. When defenders play their role properly, there is no ball to get into the goal, no matter how great a forward is up front and how much he or she is willing to contribute. Forwards are rarely able to fall back to their half of the field to tackle for the ball, and still have the strength to bring it all the way to the opponent’s goal (Howards, Statistics of Soccer). It is the defenders who do the job of winning the ball for their team and sending it across to their forwards. It is also the defender who covers for the forward when the latter loses the ball and there is a danger of a fast counter-attack from the opposing side. Defenders have to be ready to make a sliding tackle—alert and ready to back up their teammates in the event of a mistake. Defenders themselves do not have the luxury of making mistakes, since even a small slip on their part might result in a goal for their opponents, and thus, a loss that fans are likely not to forgive. Being a successful defender calls for a consistent, reliable, and sound performance; on the other hand, being a forward is about readiness to react in an instant, having an awareness of the play of the ball without turning around—and of course, a brave heart and a firm kick to strike for your team. One quality that any soccer player should have—whether they are a forward, a defender, a goalkeeper, or a midfielder—is the ability to sense the team and each member of it, read their intentions and act in unison for the team’s victory (Richard, Analysis of Soccer Positions). We cannot truly say which position is more valuable: whether it is the defender or the striker, since they are both irreplaceable to the team and could not work effectively without each other.