British wait for men's champion goes on

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Britain's wait for another men's grand slam singles champion will extend into at least a 73rd year after Andy Murray lost to Roger Federer in the U.S. Open final on Monday.

The sixth seed had been hoping to become the first British man to win one of the sport's four major trophies since Fred Perry lifted the U.S. Open title in 1936.

Murray's run to the final had lifted his nation and there was no shame in falling short at the last hurdle against a rejuvenated Federer who won his 13th grand slam title.

The Scot was only the fourth British man since Perry to even reach a grand slam final, after Bunny Austin, John Lloyd and Greg Rusedski.

At 21, though, time is on his side and he has been tipped as a future grand slam champion by the likes of former world number one John McEnroe.

For a country that invented the sport, hosts arguably the most prestigious of the four grand slam tournaments at Wimbledon and invests heavily in the game, the lack of success still grates.

When Perry won at Forest Hills in 1936, the game was dominated by Britons, Australians, Americans and Frenchmen.

Now, it is global, with many countries putting more money, time and effort into finding top players.

Even in countries where investment in sport is scarce, such as Argentina and Serbia, champions are springing up as athletes use sporting success as a passport to a better life.

In 1936, three of the four grand slam tournaments were played on grass.

LAGS BEHIND

Now, only Wimbledon is still played on the surface and while other countries have adapted by playing more hard courts and clay courts, Britain lags behind.

Plenty of money is poured into the game with the Lawn Tennis Association (LTA) receiving the surplus from Wimbledon every year, which was valued at 25 million pounds ($44.60 million) in 2007.

The nation's coaches have been blamed, to the extent that the LTA has looked overseas, especially to the United States, to find the right people.

Their influence may not filter through for several years yet but the main criticism of tennis in Britain is that it is still too middle class as a sport, too expensive and elitist.

Britain's dearth of talent at the very top is often contrasted with that of France, who, going into the U.S. Open, had 15 men inside the world's top 100 compared with one Briton.

The French have also struggled to win men's grand slam titles, however, with Yannick Noah's 1983 French Open their only success.

Virginia Wade was the last British player to lift a grand slam singles title, at Wimbledon in 1977, and both Rusedski, runner-up at the 1997 U.S. Open, and Tim Henman, six times a grand-slam semi-finalist, have enjoyed success.

Neither, though, managed the holy grail of a grand slam trophy and Murray now has to shoulder the burden in a country increasingly desperate for success.

As the world number four, a ranking reached but never bettered by both Rusedski and Henman, Murray is moving in the right direction.

Critics of British tennis will point out that much of his training as a junior took place in Spain but his country will not mind if he finally can end the long wait.

(Editing by Ed Osmond)