I accept a lot of what has been said but don't necessarily agree, I think an U18 qualifying wildcard would be a good thing, I do however feel it is genuinely a waste of time for some of the best juniors where becoming national champion does not add anything, I understand how this may look to those who don't feature in that group but for those aspiring to become professional players they should be allowed the privilege of selecting the challenges that will get them there. Most of players in the group we refer too are preparing for the US Open juniors or at a level where that will be their agenda next year. That is a major time commitment those under 16 are children and have other developmental needs that should be respected and a longer term view taken.

Time is a precious comodity and it is important that it is used to develop young players, just because a child or young adult is not playing doesn't mean they are necessarily resting. For those who are genuinely academic or need grades they may well be catching up, who knows they may actually be doing what normal kids do in the summer or spending time with family etc.. because they know next year will be very full.

As things stand the national championships are still a tremendous opportunity and hold weight on any college application CV, I think it is right that there should be an incentive that makes it attractive for better players to enter but it should not be compulsory, those who enter should do so because it is the right thing for them at that time.

As it is in the States CD.  Over the years a significant number of their national champs have gone straight on to winning well in adult as well as high level junior competition.  It is seen as a selection process for national teams, WC opportunities, a showcase for college coaches  and just as a huge huge honour to get to the latter stages.

 As said, I don't think it should be compulsory. But I think it should form a significant part of the matrix calculation. Obviously, if there are true mitigating factors why a player cannot take part, then that should be taken into account. And if you don't want to be part of the system but do it your own way, then fine. But simply playing another ITF event because you happen to be lucky enough too have parents who can trot you round the world to play another ITF event should not be one of them. There is too much emphasis on ITF junior events, in my opinion, as it is. If it clashes with the US Open, and you feel that is important, (not convinced), then move the date.
Tennis here is fragmented; it is divided and divisive. A national championship should be a coming together (for players, coaches, the federation, etc. etc.) of all that is good and excellent in national tennis.    

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------       

Note that the matrix funding as we knew it then has been abolished and the LTA doesn't hand out funds to junior players like it used to. As was previously mentioned the LTA has to make it worthwhile to play the nationals especially at the 18s. I don't really get your point about not playing because of 'being lucky enough to have parents that can trot you around the world' . You seem to have a resentment for parents trying to get their children the experience that these ITFs offer - also do you know that in some cases it can be more expensive going up to Nottingham for a 4/5day Nationals than going to an ITF event somewhere in Europe? That being said we're all entitled to our different opinions but at the end of the day most parents and coaches would have discussed whether it is worthwhile doing the Nationals before deciding otherwise.

As it stands at the moment, I can quite understand the top players giving it a miss.  During the Draper era, junior ITF rankings were everything for those who received any significant funding and such players were therefore actively discouraged from playing the nationals.  We are now seeing the legacy of that policy - a truly devalued event which is nice to play, looks good on a college CV but certainly doesn't showcase the best of British junior players.  It is a shame, it used to be a great event.  I seem to recall both Heather W and Naomi Cavaday moving into our junior elite by winning the 16s.  I really feel the LTA could make so, so much more of it.  Maybe change the timing, offer some worthwhile incentives (currently the winners get a WC into a domestic 15K - if they can find such a thing!),  and actively encourage the top players to take part.  What incentives - maybe a travel grant, maybe extra WCs, maybe access to national coaches or a couple of weeks working with the experts from the NTC covering fitness, technique, scheduling etc - I'm sure they could come up with some sort of attractive package.  But having the top players is key.....that's what makes the US version so prestigious - the latter stages are a damn sight tougher than the majority of futures events.