I'd love it if those scores turned out to be a mistake from the tournament office.

Really good though from Skupski....pity the rest....only Goodall got close !

Oh dear, that's terrible after such a promising day yesterday. If he can't start taking chances as good as this, Josh is going to be nowhere near the top 300 even by the end of this year.

Doubles Q/F

Karatchenia (Blr) / Voltchkov (Blr) d. Flanagan / Illingworth 6-3, 6-2
Norfeldt (Swe) / Nylen (Swe) d. Chramosta (Cze) / Evans 6-0, 6-1
Goodall / Skupski d. Ruhby / Granbow (Ger) (4) 7-5, 6-4
Bamford / Pederson (Den) d. Dell'acqua (Ita) / Giraudo (Ita) 6-0, 6-2

Doubles S/F

Karatchenia (Blr) / Voltchkov (Blr) v Norfeldt (Swe) / Nylen (Swe)
Goodall / Skupski v Bamford / Pederson (Den)

Heiki

You're right, in the long term we've got to hope for better.

Round 1 was amazing, round 2 disappointing but not unexpected.

I think we should have got one player on rankings through - but that was Goodall, not Skupski!

I don't think we can be disappointed as far as rankings go. Just got to hope that some of the guys continue to improve and accumulate points.

I see the Sunderland results are already posted, but I wonder whether any of you want to hear the stories behind the scores; I spent most of the day watching, but as I had a 135 minute drive home, I didn't stay to the end of a desperately disappointing day for UK men's tennis. I did, though, see all the men's singles, and offer my views, for what they're worth.

The best of the day was Ken Skupski; his was a fierce, hard-hitting battle dominated by serving. During the first set, Ken simply couldn't cope with the weight of Dell'Acqua's serve, not to mention the Italian's flashing forehand. As he gradually came to terms with the heavy blows, Ken's better all-round game game him the edge and, though, it was never going to be a conclusive victory, Ken's serve, from the beginning of the second set, wasn't really threatened. Good one, Ken.

There were also two straightforward defeats: Dan Cox looked like a wee boy playing a man, I'm afraid - and I suppose that's just what it was. Karatchenia's greater weight of shot simply blew Dan away; perhaps he doesn't yet have the physical, or mental, stamina to cope with difficult ties on consecutive days. Alex Slabinsky, too, looked out of his depth; on the positive side, his shot placement was, at times, delightful, picking out the corners and running his opponent ragged. Running, however, was one of Mannarino's strenghts - a great retriever. It seemed that Slabinski lacked the weight of shot to damage the frenchman; he could very rarely get the ball beyond his man. His volleying, too, lacked penetration, and many backhands, both drives and volleys, found the very bottom of the net.

Exempt from any criticism is Chris Eaton; his was another 'slugfest', akin to Skupski's. Serving, on both sides, was excellent; in general, Chris had less difficulty retaining his than did Chramosta. Unfortunately, however, while Chris could never quite win the break points which came his way, the Czech did, twice, in consecutive Eaton service games, at the end of the first set and then right at the start of the second. Exciting, quality tennis, though.

The two other losses, whilst disappointing, were also very embarrassing, partly because entirely self-inflicted, partly because of the appalling behaviour of our representatives. Josh Goodall was clearly in a different class from his opponent; he led 3-1, with a break of serve, of course, and had Sitak at 0-40 - about to be 4-1 with Josh's serve to come, we all thought. Then came an explosion; Goodall's double-break producing cross-court clipped the line right beside the umpire - or so Josh thought! "Out", came the call. Goodall could not, would not, believe it; he argued, he remonstrated, he accused - then, basically, he sulked. Five straight points, six of the next nine games went; 1-3 and 0-40 became 7-5 1-0, and still Goodall played all the quality tennis, but decreasingly often and all interspersed with moans. I moved along the viewing gallery to watch Eaton; at one point, there was an almighty yell, which went on and on - the other matches were disrupted. Chramosta, two courts away, appealed directly to Goodall to quieten down - and was told in no uncertain terms, including the clear use of four notorious letters, to mind his own business. The poor umpire, a very restrained lady, I thought, was again abused, 'not fit to be an umpire', 'a joke'; Goodall was so disenchanted that he served at set-point down with a ball lying in the court, on his side, half way to the net - a real danger of serious injury, but it demonstrated perfectly, I thought, his appalling attitude. Goodall again looked the class act in the second set, but, again, his attitude let him down. Another explosion came near the end, at 5-5; "Every time there's a break point, you just make a mistake. Just answer that question. I just want you to concentrate!" ... and the match just dribbled away, with neither handshake, nor word, for the umpire. And the disputed point that started it all? I had an excellent view, looking down and right along the line, a view bettered only by the umpire's! Josh's shot was out, not by much, but clearly out. What a waste of a talent. I haven't seen any of the rest of Josh's falling away this year, so I don't know wheteher today's pantomime was symptom or cause, but having witnessed how he destroyed his own concentration, I can't say I'm surprised at his difficulties - just a pity that Dan Cox seemed to be looking up to Josh in the aftermath, as were two or three other young ones. I didn't, though, see any of the 'grown-up' players spending any time with him.

Ian Flanagan was the other embarrassment, though for different reasons. Flanagan looked quite brilliant for much of the time - the best player I saw today other than Voltchkov - but couldn't seem to retain concentration. What talent - though no great wight of shot, he seems to have wrists which roll faster than everyone else's, you could almost 'hear' the topspin, even the slice, as balls fizzed off his racket. He won the first set in spite of dropping his serve twice, went a little unluckily 1-4 down in the second and gave up; didn't actually serve underarm, but may as well have! he certainly didn't run during those last two games. The policy looked a little dangerous as Masson easily won the first game of the deciding set but, then, Ian's form became quite sensational; he took the belgian's serv to love with two beautiful winners and two (very) forced errors. He took his own serve to love, with one beautiful lob when under fierce pressure, plus the following two games. 0-1 had become 5-1 without masson doing much wrong. The Ian took his foot off the accelerator; it looked as though he thought he could cruise - all smiles, lots of glances to the gallery. two games went in a flash, 3-5. Concentration returned, and Masson was two match points against; a fierce punch to Masson's backhand corner, the return hit wide and deep to the forehand, Masson scrambles, sticks out a despairing racket, the ball ballons at shoulder height towards flanagan, who moves in for the kill - a forehand drive-volley, the decides to leave it - it falls in! Ian has now become furious with himself - "I don't want to be in this F*%$£!+ hole anyway" - and Sunderland seems quite a nice place, 'the safest city in the north of England", it brags. Concentration has now totally gone and with it, the match; at the end, Flanagan takes out his ire on his racket- hammering it into the ground over and over again, apparently quite calm now, but intent on dismembering the offending item.

One win out of six - sad.