91Èȱ¬

It's all very well for the press to sound off after yet another LTA debacle but why not think a bit more deeply about your own role in the debate. As a journalist you need to challenge more vigorously some of the nonsense emanating from the LTA; the comments of Steve Martens being a case in point. It can be strongly argued that the LTA does in fact provide a social security system for our so-called professional players. None of those players should be funded in my opinion, neither should winning mixed doubles titles at Wimbledon be particularly championed nor free publicity given to the proposed launch of a website for the 'Booty n' Stretch' doubles team. Journalism could help the tennis cause through constant and positive reporting of what's going on in the nether regions of the sport and give more of a fillip to the grass roots, the real coal face of tennis from where the singles champions will emerge.

the problem is that it takes 10 years to take a 11 year old to 21 year old top 100 player. The guys been in the job for 3 years there problems but they will not be solved over night.

in reality tennis as playing sport is not that popular say compared to football or golf especially for young kids my best friend lived in Sweden for 10 years, and his younger brother played tennis and football with full support of his school and they had good indoor courts and other support that for all the kids (his brother now at Loughborough uni doing sport science).

That even with more money and support with smaller playing pool that comes allot from similar backgrounds shows how nations like Sweden that small % of UK population has been more successful in the pro era.

both Sweden and Holland in Tennis and football over performer for there size because of culture of the game as universal game than just stereotyped middle class game for mostly southern English people play in which Murry is exception that proves the rule.

I am not saying another tim henman is not possible it is but they will not amount with regularity there needs more players from cross the UK and from all backgrounds to sold tennis.

I think people are being too hard on the boys. They're only human, they're not tennis machines. What would be a better option - stick them outdoors on a cracking cement court in the middle of a delapidated area to somehow make them desperate to escape? Really? One of the best things about the UK is that we give opportunity and some level of comfort.

What I find amusing, and incorrect, is when the LTA and "British" tennis take responsibility for producing Andy. He left the country to train in Spain precisely because what was on offer here wasn't right for him. What do other tennis academies - like Bolleri or Sanchez Casal - have that Roehampton doesn't?

Andy trains there when he's in the UK and has said on his site the facilities are good. So I think it would be a mistake to take those away from the players. Something is up with the training system on offer, and it has widely been accepted that Jamie Murray didn't have the best time in the Brit "system", going from top singles junior to... not being a top singles senior (I know many go through that, but, again, it's something the Murrays have spoken about specifically regarding British training).

What's the answer? I don't know, but I don't think it lies in punishing the players.

Contacted LTA last year to find out about any local area tennis coaching - I'm new to all this...but I thought that if there are centres/school holiday coaching facilities linked to football clubs there could be something similar in the tennis world?
[Personal details removed by Moderator]
etc
not even a reply out of them...

How do they expect to have a pool of players to draw on if they can't even look at the grassroots?

Maybe tennis over here still has the feeling of being posh? If even first division football clubs can get involved in holiday coaching, out of school coaching, why can't the LTA in tennis?

The problem is, as it always has been, that British tennis is rooted in a middle-class club system, in which club sessions are dominated by doubles matches to accomodate numbers, and because more senior players find it less tiring. The lack of communal courts is shocking; if you realistically want to play tennis to improve or get coaching, you will have to join a club which usually is prohibitively expensive for most people, hence why we don't have the numbers. The exclusive nature of British grass-roots tennis means that it is very unlikely that we'll ever have more than one or two very good players inside the top twenty, or even fifty, because the pool is so small. Andy murray, as stated, is the exception, but his case further proves the narrow pool of talent in British tennis - more kids like him are surely out there, but havent got a hope of finding out whether they could make it to the very top level. Draper would do well to take on the clubs' membership policies, and attempt to open up courts to more members of the public.

exon rugby 89 is right. Tennis is still stuck in its middle class roots whereas the likes of rugby, golf and cricket are opening up more to the masses whilst football has always been accessible. The ultimate problem is that tennis does not have the same mass appeal for boys in this country as football and the other aforementioned sports and, unless more public courts are found, tennis will not progress in the UK.

The other problem, in my opinion is the attitude of the tennis fans, especially at Wimbledon. In the past the interest in British mens tennis has been focused almost entirely on Henman and Rusedski whilst other players such as Chris Bailey, Chris Wilkinson, Mark Petchey and others never received the same backing from the fans. The same appears to be happening now with Andy Murray whilst the likes of Chris Eaton and Josh Goodall will struggle to gain support. Every British player needs to be and deserves backing from all quarters, not just the top two or three players.

I don't see that removing Llyod will do any good. It's hardly his fault that the players at his disposal are not good enough for that level.

Tennis continues to be the preserve of the rich and upper classes. Until they understand that there is massive talen amongst the ordinary people, and then nurture that talent, we will continue to have only one decent player every 10 years.

Bring tennis away from the toffs, and back to the people

We were frankly never going to win this tie once Andy had to retire, as the youngsters needed someone like Andy to bring them on. What I don't understand however is why after Andy had to drop out Jamie Murray was not drafted into the doubles team with Ross Hutchins. I believe this would have given the team a boost and may have meant that the guys in the singles went into their matches with a feeling that they just may be able to pull something out of the tie.

Fully agree with comments re the emphasis on doubles at 'typical' UK clubs ('your ball partner...' etc), but has to be added to the indoor/outdoor argument. Basically, tennis in the UK is seen as a summer (actually, June/July) game and with most public courts outdoors, proper play/coaching is only feasible when it's either not raining or not freezing cold (ie: not much). If I am correct, other N. European countries have ensured public provision of indoor courts - and have seen a commensurate rise in the number of quality players produced - maybe this is something the LTA should consider helping with funding for. If not, the best option still seems to be the A Murray route - and go somewhere warmer and/or where there is a culture that breeds success (eg: Florida).

OK seems we're all agreed that we need to get tennis out to the masses and make it more attractive as a career. Is there money to be made from being a professional tennis player - of course there is - it's been reported Andrew Murray could earn up to £100 million over the next 10 years. Stands comparison with a Premier League footballer, but doesn't appear in the media nearly so often, so of course tennis won't look as attractive.
Getting tennis to the masses means the LTA using the government 'health and wellbeing agenda' to persuade local authorities to build and maintain public tennis courts with free or nominal hire costs, and coaching to pull kids into the sport. And getting tennis/mini tennis onto theprimary school sport curriculum. OK we then get the numbers and then we've got to provide a cheap competitive framework that's affordable for parents.
Incentivised support to players - yes, but only as a carrot and based on performance.
Murray, Henman and Rusedski were all from outside the LTA systems (now and then), however on the women's side Anne Keothavong has shown that the the facilities and support on offer via the LTA can make a difference as she has risen from outside the top 100 to inside the top 50 in the women's game over the last 12 months.
Jonathan, some comments for your consideration: -
1) you ask in your introduction what 'On Track' means in relation to juniors potentially reaching the top 100 - My understanding of the LTA target is that it's based on statistical research of perfromances/records from juniors across the globe who have made the transition into senior tennis and then made the top 100. We then compare our juniors performances against those statistics and all things being equal those juniors have the POTENTIAL to reach top 100. Not a guarantee but possibly a step in the right direction. The real crux however will be the transition of those players from junior to senior and that to me seems to be the area to focus on. Looking at the names or previous boys and girls junior Wimbledon winners and runners-up (1990 - 2007) less than a third go on 'make it', so Laura Robson and hopefully those on track still have a tough time ahead.
2) In your commentary you mentioned you'd seen the play-offs. I agree they were a good idea but was disappointed that Eaton and Goodall didn't play off as the two unbeaten players. It would have replicated a grand slam event (having to play the next round) and provided a finale to the week with a competitive edge.
3) Both you and Greg spotted patterns in the first days singles matches - namely Goodall's opponent when serving to the advantage court on key points went down the middle (first and often second serves) - Josh Goodall didn't pick this up; and Chris Eaton stands a long way from the centre mark (he's almost nearer the tramline) also when serving to the advantage court - so really doesn't have much option but to serve to a righthander's backhand from that side. If he tries to go down the middle its a very small target as the ball is always travelling towards a RH receivers forehand hitting zone. Surely something that should have been communicated to the captain so he could advise his players. I've no doubt the Ukrainian team used the lap-top to identify patterns and pass it on the their captian as the matches progressed.

Having watched the Davies Cup tie this weekend, I can in many ways fully agree with Jonathan’s blog. I do think that many players are paid too much before they even set foot on a court. I have been coaching for over twenty years and seen all types of player. Sadly, no matter what people say and do, it is still a case of if the face fits.! I have seen excellent junior players that have not been given the chance to show off their skills and ability because they either came from the wrong club or were not in with the ‘in crowd’. This does happen and will continue to happen no matter what anyone says until that day dawns when a person in charge has the guts to stand up and upset a few people by saying, you are not good enough or you are not pulling your weight! There are juniors out there who would die for the chance to prove themselves to others and have that hunger that can make them into winners. It’s a sad day that after twenty years of coaching I turned my back on the sport I breathed and loved because juniors I coached from all areas and all backgrounds in schools, clubs and community parks could not get that chance even when they beat other rated club players in tournaments.
Something has to be done with British tennis. I do think that Roger Draper has the right idea, but at the present time it is the structuring and the people below him that need the re-evaluation.

As touched upon, the middle class nature of the sport creates the problems highlighted by the Davis cup. I do believe that tennis has the potential to be opened up in the way rugby and cricket have in recent years, its a great game, but the expense is the limiting factor. To join a club as a junior including coaching is maybe £150-200 a year, fairly reasonable when compared to other sports, but outdoor courts have limited use in the UK due to the weather. To join a club with indoor courts which you can actually use all year round is much much more expensive, a few hundred a year plus a fee of around £20 an hour to actually play. This is insanity, how do we ever expect to attract enough youngsters when fees like this exist, apart from the middle/upper classes, especially with sports like football available at a fraction of the cost. It just isn't going to happen, and without all year access to courts, how do we expect to create the superstars the public and press demand? Until some of the LTA's funding goes into subsidising court use, British tennis will never be able to compete with the likes of Spain, France, USA, due to simple court time issues. Its all very well concentrating funding on those who are already involved in the sport and are showing potential, but what about all those who are missing out entirely - by increasing the base of the pyramid we increase our odds of achieving success further down the line.

In summary, a bit of perspective and honesty is required - we either accept that we aren't going to be a great tennis nation, and settle for the odd moment of glory as we are at the moment, or we invest more money, and invest it in more ares of the sport, instead of just the elite 36 players in the country. Is there a real desire to push on and punch above our weight as the Swedes and Dutch do? Do we really, as a nation, want to invest money in the pursuit of success? I'm not sure we do...

You would presume (or at least hope) the LTA has borrowed the idea of 'benchmarking' from industry and has gone to countries like Spain, had chats with their tennis body etc, and have tried to work out what makes them so successful at producing talent. From there you would hope the LTA has adjusted its system accordingly to help produce better talent.

You only need to look at how British cycling has done this and how the England rugby team did this leading to their 2003 triumph to see how borrowing ideas can implement successful change.

Unounos - thanks for comment re benchmarking that is what he LTA is doing with 'Juniors on Track'.
I like the parallel with British Cycling especially now it has announced a raod team for 2010. What was the initial set of criteria it applied - testing potential riders/recruits to see if they had the necessary physiological profile(s) to reach the required standard.
An anecdote about Celtic football club was that when scouting players they looked to see if they had pace - if so they could add the skills through coaching.
Tennis could learn from both as it seems to me an essential to be an international level tennis player would be to have great fluidity of movement (side to side; front to back) coupled with athletism. Of the current british men several look as though they should be good ahletes but only Andy Murray moves well.

Hi Jonathan,

It's good to hear the recognition from commentators like yourself that there are a people behind the scenes who are united in trying to change the culture of tennis in Britain.

I'm one of those 'glass half full' guys, out their in the sticks, who will stay relentlessly focused on doing my bit to help drive progress in local tennis. I see it as my responsibility to do this, and don't asume it's the LTA's job alone to sort the GB Team out. All of us who love the sport can do something to help.

If we're going to breed more ‘tennis warriors’ as Judy Murray would say, we've got to get our juniors to learn their trade, and learn how to win matches from a much earlier age. That's why I know I can do my bit by organising more matches for our future stars to play at our club.

We need revolution right up my street! It’s locally where kids don’t get the chance to compete. I agree with many of your correspondents that the culture of tennis in this country is the problem. We just can't pick our GB Team from a very big talent pool at the moment. Josh didn't seem to have much of a game plan, and he himself said he had no clarity of thought during his execution on Friday. He's technically proficient, has the heart - but perhaps not the tennis brain just yet.

Our longer term plan should be to develop loads more 'Warriors' who have the brains, and have found ways of winning with game plans A,B,C and D from an early age. We need to find players who have learnt how to grind results out, thrive on the thrill of the battle, and can 'think clearly under pressure'.

The only way we're going to do this is if we develop a culture of local competition and not rely on the LTA to sort this out. It's far too easy to be critical of the LTA, whilst reading the Times over breakfast. My Tennis Club takes responsibility for providing competition, just as a football club takes responsibility for developing their fixture list. The problem is young players don't learn to compete early enough and concentrate on technical developments far to early, without remembering that it's about winning points, and that's hard when you're under pressure as Josh Goodall knows!

Our GB Team couldn't take the pressure over the weekend. They appeared to be still learning their tennis strategy, under their first real experiences of Davis Cup pressure. We need to develop loads more talented players to pick from who have learnt their trade through competing round the corner from there house.

I'll do my bit to get the young ones cracking and learning how to do this at my club. I do this not for a 'blankety blank cheque book and pen', but for the love of it. If a few more people do this, times by a few hundred more in each county, then we'll have done our bit to help develop players who can get us out of Europe/Africa Zone Group I, other than Andy M.

I fully agree with exonrugby89 with regards to the situation with UK tennis. I also believe the solution is to get tennis in the schools and rebuilding the sport - where I came from you couldnt play tennis at school because the tennis club would not always let them use the courts...

In addition it's all well to say you cant play Lloyd because of the skill in the team, with regards to the singles players, but he picked Hutchins and Fleming as his doubles team (neither ranked in the top 100 for doubles) ahead of J Murray (ranked 38). I dont care how off form Murray is, he's ranked highly, is playing doubles at a higher level and has more experience than these guys. Why have the media completely ignored his? Lloyd needs to be held accountable for this - he took a gamble and the doubles team he picked failed miserably...

17.

Jamie Murray is indeed 38th, but Ross Hutchins is ranked 44th, and may take over as the leading doubles player as Jamie reached the semi-finals at Indian Wells last year with Max Mirnyi.

"a relegation play-off match in September against lowly Poland"

Jonathan -

It's little phrases like the above that provide a clue to the real source of the problem.
This phrase reeks of snobbery and the elitist idea that GB are entitled to a higher standing in world tennis by birthright - when the reality is success has to be earned the hard way.

Good for Poland! They have achieved a standing roughly equivalent to GB, no doubt through hard work and determination - and presumably not by dismissing their peers as "lowly".

Until this "glory days of the British Empire" attitude is purged from everyone involved in British tennis (including the press who cover it) we are going to get the same shoddy results.

If you want to see the right sort of attitude look at Nadal and Spain. Can you imagine Nadal referring to any opponent as "lowly"?!!

And as for payments made to GB players: what's so surprising? This is the country that has now patented the idea that you get massive rewards for abject failure (see under "banking").

p.s. they weren't a"team of Glasgow rookies" they were a team of rookies that happened to be playing in Glasgow. That's not the same thing.

RE:18

You are quite correct, my mistake...

Still is it not then a no brainer decision to play Murray/Hutchins especially since they have played together before? They are both fairly young and just building their doubles careers playing a lot of major events - why not make this partnership our future doubles and continue to play them together and build for the future? State that these are your top two and you're going to be standing by them - this would give them a lot of confidence going forward would it not?

In addition the author speaks of Goodall's 'inability to change tactics in the first match' surely this is something that Lloyd must also take responsibility for? Davis Cup tennis is the only time coaches can sit with players in tennis so why not ask Lloyd why he didnt prompt Goodall to change his tactics?

I dont blame Lloyd for the loss and state of British tennis but more should be asked about his input into this loss:
* Selecting the wrong doubles team
* Failing to advise his players on tactics during games

In fact that he didnt even pick the singles players - what exactly is he doing?

@ 20

The problem with playing both Murray and Hutchins in the doubles is that if either of our 2 singles players picks up an injury on the 1st day, we will have no back up for the final day. in DC conditions i'd be surprised if either of Ross or Jamie could beat a top 300 player - even the current GB no2 couldn't do that!

Also they don't really ever play together save in the odd DC match and are by no means guaranteeing us a Rubber as some of the worlds best doubles teams, like the Bryan Brothers do.

That is why Flemming is a good back up option as he is decent on both the singles and doubles court (and is currently under ranked due to a recent return from the tour).

One of my main issues with Lloyd is that he seem to have no rapport with the players during the match. there just seems no connection, and you get the impression that if a match is going badly Lloyd doesn't have the motivational skills to help a player turn it around.

Lots of problems, of course Lloyd shouldn't go. The LTA is a typical British beaurocracy, like The FA, the 91Èȱ¬ Office and many others that just doesn't know what it's doing. We don't have enough people playing the game, more courts needed, more media coverage for tennis below the top level (everyone likes to get on TV, it's a drug people want more of), even of top level tennis. If the LTA wants to get more people involved in tennis they should be helping terrestrial TV companies to buy ATP, WTA, ITF rights etc. But really, why don't we just pull out of the Davis Cup, it's an unfair burden on Murray and I don't like the competition. No tennis fan friends of mine do either and they're not all British. I like cheering for a Spaniard one day and a Serbian the next, why can't we have one sport that does away with nationalism...

Forget about all the petty, nickel and dime incentive programs. Take every red cent of the Wimbledon profits and build outdoor tennis courts in every public park in the country(or whatever the hell Britian is). Wherever there is new construction of public indoor athletic facilities such as a swimming pool or whatever - make sure they squeeze a tennis court in as well. If you build it they will come.

Andy Murray, Ross, Jamie Murray, Cris Eaton as the team and Jamie Baker when he is fit as back up or Goodal as back up. 5 man team so if there is a problem then with one of our doubbles players goes Andy can play and if there is a singles prob the 5th player will play that will be Baker or Goodal to replace. When they will be traning they should all play today and then we just about have a team. A Great singles player and a dobbles parkership and an alright second singles player Eaton likes the big occasitions thats what I think. Tell me if you think that is wrong but that is my thinking about a weakish British tennis team but we can make the most of it.

As with all UK sports the problem is a lack of fascilities at the ground level. Instead of paying 30k a year for one player - why not pay for a 1000 kids to spend the summer playing. That way there will be a much richer pool of potential tallent to pick from rather than the kids of the more well off. The courts I played on every summer as a kid are not covered and charging the average pocket money for an hour. The fields around the schools are now sold off for housing stock because the local council needs money to pay for its high flying chief exec. but never fear - if the X-Box makes it to the olympics by 2012 we will be well placed. There is no encouragement to partake in sports, with the exception of football where the stream of missbehaving overpaid kids is a real attraction. PE in schools is seen as an obligation and a chore rather than the fun it used to be. My old school sold off it's grounds and replaced them with an all weather enclosed surface which noone can use because noone will open it and noone will supervise (Basketball was too dangerous for them....), but this is OK because the old pitches replaced by a better facility! it didn't matter that it can't be used by the community.
So the answer is to encourage everyone to partake and enjoy sports. Plough money into facilities that everyone can use. only then will you have a rich crop of potential who are hungary to win because they want to win and not because they see it as a meal ticket.

As a committee member at a small tennis club, I think that the LTA has completely lost the plot. We get initiative after initiative, each one being scrapped long before it can be judged a success or not. Money is wasted hand over fist on spoilt, cossetted players who have no fight in them. We pay the LTA nearly £10 per head affiliation fee out of our subscriptions, and are paying £4800 per year to repay the loan we had from them when we relaid the courts. by the time we have cleared that off they nwill need doing again. The small clubs, which should be the roots of the game as in football, rugby and cricket end up paying for everything. We are currently taking tennis into local schools and paying £3000 per year for the priviledge.
People are starting to ask what is the benefit of having the LTA in its present form. Petchey is right in that it needs a radical overhaul to redistribute the wealth in the sport to the areas where it will have an effect. The results of that will not come quickly, it will take 10 years, but change has to be started and the nettle grasped.

The comments made in most of these blog postings are well made, and have been repeated over and over again, but nothing changes. Perhaps it is time to act on Mark Petchey's recommendation that the LTA be scrapped, and the over paid execs wth it.
However, there is one point that has been overlooked. We should forget all this nonsense about the "mental" aspects of the game. It is simply about hitting a ball over a net and into the court. Physical fitness and skill are all that is needed initially. To stress the mental aspects is ridiculous. How refreshing it was to hear the young Spanish player who had just beaten Venus Williams in the Australian open, when questioned about how she changed tactics after losing the first set, replied, "I just played tennis". She obviously was not "media trained".
A recent visit was made to the new facilities at Roehamptom by the 91Èȱ¬ sports commentator. He had never played tennis before, and asked for a lesson to start. He thought he would be given a racquet and some balls to play with. But no. He was told he first had to "learn to read the game". With rubbish methods like this being followed, there is no hope for the game in this country.

Any parent who has a son or daughter playing as a performance player today knows exactly why Britain cannot produce tennis players.

I have seen the LTA fail consistently over the past 10 years and i do not see that ever changing. There are a lot of people in the LTA system being paid a lot of money and actually delivering nothing. in particular i am talking about the so called Performance Coaches. The current academy system that is in place is an absolute Joke. If you are a parent thinking of getting your child into performance tennis you need to consider the following;

1. Make sure you have a significant income.
2. Make sure at least one of you does not work.
3. As soon as possible get your child out of the UK system.

If you can meet all of the above requirements then you have a chance, if not just stick to playing club tennis and let your kids enjoy the experience.

There is a lot of doom and gloom surrounding British Tennis at the moment, but there need not be. Key operators around the country are working hard to open the sport up to the masses. This is not a short-term project. I operate a tennis facility management company that has 26 public courts within a city (all floodlit) available for public hire. Organised club activities and coaching programmes involve around 1000 people each week, coming from a variety of social backgrounds. We deliver coaching in schools to around 7000 children each year, which is free to the children who participate. We also subsidise adult participation heavily. A variety of key agencies including the LTA, Sport England, local authorities and School-Sport Partnerships offer funding to keep this going, so there is support and forward thinking going on. The major problem in Britain comes from the "member culture" that pervades the majority of tennis clubs around the country. If those clubs opened up their facilities for local people to play, the game's image would be revolutionised and the throughput of talented young players would increase rapidly. We musn't lose sight of the fact that tennis is an incredibly hard sport to play and is simply not as accessible as games such as football ("jumpers for goalposts"). Therefore, as many barriers as possible need to be removed to aid this process.

It's not all doom and gloom. Hasn't anyone been tracking the progress of Oliver Golding (from Middlesex) who at 15 was one of the youngest players ever to win an ITF grade 4 event earlier this year (younger incidentally than Andy Murray was when he won his first ITF grade 4). This boy has talent, but the LTA keep quiet about him because he hasn't come through their system (surprise surprise!), nor is he on Team Aegon, but is clearly the most talented player we have coming through. Unfortunately, though, it'll be another three years before the Davis Cup Captain can call upon him to support Andy Murray!

However good the raw talent is in this country if we don't employ the best modern coaching and training techniques we are going to remain a tennis backwater and the likes of Andy Murray will succeed despite not because of the system. Tennis is more technical than many other sports and if you don't have coaches focussing on getting kids to develop the right technique and specialised fitness regimes at an early age they are going to struggle to compete at the highest level in their later teenage years. There are senior tennis coaches at Roehampton who have never made it to the top of the game and yet we are expecting them to bring through kids to play at a world level. How about converting Roehampton into a coaching centre of excellence and bringing over top coaches from France or Spain to teach our British coaches?

exonrugby89 is spot on. I look back at my life and one of my biggest regrets was not pursuing tennis more, even if only to play at a good level just enjoy what is one of the best games to participate in. But, and a big but, is that it was not always my choice.

I started playing at a young age but never got to improve at a rate expected of a child in say Eastern Europe or the US as nobody really played at school and the courts were the usual shabby efforts mixed in with basketball and netball lines. Sometimes you had the "deathwire" where the net was invisible and you took the risk of becoming headless!

Not till I was 15 I joined a club, but this pretty expensive and full of well to do's who hated us upstarts, especially those from comprehensive education.

Like most I knew who hit their 20's, they had not carried on the game yet some of us decided to try again before their legs gave way.

And again, the all too British attitude was evident when I joined a local club. Doubles galore but no singles unless it was half 5 on a saturday morning and you brought ya gran's aunt to umpire or some other nonsensicle rule.

Can't ever see it changing. So sad, as if I ever I had a choice, I can think of no better way to enjoy a career as a Pro tennis player.

Another to agree with the comments by exonrugby89. Tennis just isn't played enough like other popular sports are in the UK and apart from being classed as a middle class sport there is also a huge shortage of decent courts.
I live in Argentina and it's quite incredible to see the vast amount of tennis courts over here and although there are plenty in the middle and upper class areas there are also more than an ample amount of facilities in lesser developed parts.
For a country that is now firmly grounded to being a developing nation it's down to the sheer volume of courts that are on offer that they have produced a glittering amount of top 20 players over the past 10 years. I also don't know what kind of support they receive from the Argentine Tennis Association but I can guess quite confidently that it isn't very much.
Until we are more passionate about the sport (and don't only tune in for those two weeks in June) things won't get much better - there will always be (hopefully) exceptions to the rule, a la Murray - but just imagine how things might be in the UK if there were courts littered around everywhere.

Too much effort is put into finding "the next Tim Henman" or "the next Andy Murray" (and before that it was "the next John Lloyd, Buster Mottram or Roger Taylor", to name just a few other of our there-or-thereabouts players who managed to get into the top 20 or so but never won a major title).

but that's just ONE player. To be frank I think British tennis, as a whole, was in a better state while our best player was Jeremy Bates - who never got higher than about 40 in the world, but we had a good collection of decent players after him: even the likes of Mark Petchey, Chris Wilkinson, Chris Bailey, Andrew Castle, Andrew Foster were at least all capable of breaking into the top 100 on their day, even if they never quite all did it at once.

Top-20 players are exceptional. Any one could win a major title (it's unfortunate that Henman's peak came while Sampras was also at the top of his game, Henman was so clearly the SECOND best grass-court player after him, and about 4th/5th overall in the world). The crying shame is that our system is not producing hosts of top-100 players and a few top-50s, people who could get into the Grand Slam tournaments by right, and at least put British tennis on the map in world terms. Geniuses are always going to be exceptional: but when was the last time a British tennis player OTHER than the current "great hope for British tennis" even got IN to a Grand Slam tournament? Henman was, and Murray is, capable of winning Wimbledon (though Henman never actually succeeded, and Murray hasn't had time yet), but where are the Bateses, Petcheys and Wilkinsons to back them up?

Systems don't produce great players - great players will succeed despite any system, not because of it. The system's job is to put the backup players in place, half a dozen players into the top 100, half a dozen qualifiers-by-right for the French, Australian and US Opens, all of them with a fair chance of progressing to the second round if drawn against someone of comparable ranking: people who could, if circumstances drafted them into the Davis Cup team, guarantee to effortlessly smack down anyone who is 250 or 300 in the world, at the very least. We should have had at least a dozen reserves capable of beating the people Ukraine actually sent against us (world number 227, world number 398) no matter how bad an off-day they had.

"The worst is not so long as we can say: This is the worst."

The glimmer of hope is: we recognise we have a problem. Some years ago we lost to (I think) Romania, which left us in a sort of pub league with Easter Island and Tierra Del Fuego - and the coach said it wasn't a bad result. THAT was a low point.

I'm sorry but blaming this on a lack of facilities is a little short sighted. I agree there is a lack of facilities but most leisure centre halls can facilitate a tennis court as they are mostly big enough. I myself came from a working class school that had 2 tennis courts, neither of which were ever used as football, rugby or basketball were played instead. This I think is where the issue lies. Tennis is frankly still considered to be for the aristocracy and is ignored by the vast majority of the population. Tennis needs to be given back to the masses by making it much more accessible, and frankly more interesting. Only then will the few odd gems of talent be unearthed and nurtured into potential Grand Slam winners.

As posters have already pointed out, even if a child shows interest in Tennis it is far too expensive to nurture that talent. At £20 an hour that is ridiculous. Why can they not start with Junior clubs subsidised by the LTA with regular Junior competitions. From here the winners could be given scholarships and nurtured with the idea that hard work breeds success.

The problem is the majority of British Tennis players already come from a priviliged background and do not have the ambition to be the best in the world. Once they sit at 99 in the world and are being paid a nice wage they are content to stay there.

This is why the LTA does not have a large pool of players to choose from. It is because only the top 1% of the population can actually afford to play it on a regular enough basis.

The real problem is the jump between junior and ATP tour level. That basically means Futures and Challenger events.
In the recent past we have had our fair share of top level juniors.
Murray made the jump, but significantly NOT through the "LTA system".
Here money is thrown at 6 or 8 top players to travel the world looking for suitable hard court Challenger (and Futures) events.
So far this year we have had 1 Challenger in UK - and even that was in Jersey - still expensive and awkward for the majority of our top players.
But we did have the male (Evans) and female (O'Brien) champions, as well as the men's doubles runners up (Fleming/Skupski - beaten only by the runners-up in the subsequent ATP event).
We need to follow the Spanish, French and Italian models.
The Italians for example, have around 2 Challengers per month (and the same number of Futures) from February thru' June. The Spanish, French and Germans have slightly less - but more of their players are already on the main ATP tour.
I have no doubt many more Italians will join them in the next 4 or 5 years.
It's not much of an exaggeration to say that their players make the top 250 en masse basically by playing each other. I noted in one Italian Challenger in Bari in February 26 of the 32 in the main Gents Singles draw were Italians!
That's an extreme example; but it highlights what their Association does for their players.
- Surely it's a far more efficient use of LTA money to run a Challenger event, with at least 10 or 12 British players involved (qualifiers, wildcards or main draw), than it is to send one or two on a trip half way round the world which ends up in a fruitless 1st round defeat?
Meanwhile, the rest of our top 20 players sit on their thumbs, trying to avoid clay court embarrassment.
Typically, running a UK Challenger would provide 50 or 60 'player-hours' of quality competitive play experience, instead of the 4 or 5 provided in early defeats in Thailand or South Africa.
Start now with 12 or 15 on a local Challenger circuit - In 5 years or so we could have 25 or 30, in the to 250, and eventually 10 or more in the top 100.
I predict that Italy will have 10 to 15 top 100 players in 2 years time, supplanting many of the French and Spanish players, whose associations now run slightly fewer "feeder" (Challenger) events than the Italians.