One Mic wrote:@Innnovation - because your location says UK and you seem to be a big Tennis fan
Why don't Britain produce WORLD CLASS tennis players who win grand slams on a regular basis?
Aside from Andy Murray, there is no one even close to him.
^ and even he hasn't even done anything that amazing in his career so far, 0 grand slam titles
How can Switzerland with a population of just 7.7 million people produce someone like Federer, where as the UK with 60 million+ can't ?
I think it's really just down to one main reason. That reason is that tennis is not very popular over here. The most exposure tennis gets in the UK is Wimbledon and that's only for what? Two weeks? You could probably throw the Davis Cup in there but I mean how many people even watch that?
In recent times, we've had a few decent players such as Tim Henman and Greg Rusedski but none of them actually won a grand slam. Let's say Tim Henman did win a grand slam, it would have been all over the news giving the game much more exposure. With more exposure, it should mean more people pick up a racket and give tennis a go. But football, rugby and cricket are the sports getting the most attention. So of course, kids will feel more inclined to play those sports as opposed to tennis because they're the most popular sports.
Going back to your population comparison, it works the same way. Because of the success of Fededer, Switzerland have been exposed to tennis much more than we are. I mean he's won countless grand slams which only helps contribute to the popularity of tennis in Switzerland. I mean he's just a rarity, a true talent. There's two Swiss tennis players in the ATP top 15. There's one British player in the top 100. That says it all, really.
Just another quick comparison, there's
14 Spanish players in the top 100. Once again, I believe hugely contributed due to the success of Nadal. It's worth mentioning that 3 of those are the in top 15. Spain's population is only 45 million, too.
I remember pundits talking about this when I was watching the Queen's; Murrary is unlucky to be in the era he is in now. I mean he's got to compete with Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. If you were to throw those three out of the equation, it's a different game. Murray would probably be the dominant figure in tennis. If he was, imagine how much exposure tennis would get here. There would be many more kids picking up a racket and producing many more quality players than we have now.