US Male Grand Slam Dry Spell Is Not Fritz's Responsibility to Carry

I have a few thoughts regarding the comments delivered by the sports network commentator Chris Fowler following the Serbian champion's win over Taylor Fritz in the US Open quarter-finals. Consider – Fritz is American, the commentator is from the US – and sports often lend themselves to patriotic sentiment. A little bit of disappointment would have been understandable. Rather, Fowler invoked the continued absence of US male players at the majors: none of them had lifted a title since Andy Roddick in 2003, and he had been the final representative in the tournament.

Everyone enjoy a narrative, myself included. But really. Suppose Fritz defeated the legend for the first time, force of nature Carlos Alcaraz was waiting in the next round, whom Fritz has yet to beat in an official match. And if he’d somehow gotten past that, it would have been title holder Jannik Sinner, versus him the American had lost 10 of the last 11 sets. The two young stars had also divided the last seven major titles (and Alcaraz proceeded to thrash a fatigued Djokovic in the next round). He stated in press following his defeat that he in fact liked his draw, because it offered the opportunity to defeat the top three competitors in the sport in succession. He is well within his right to aim for the accomplishment; an competitor is supposed to believe in themselves. But going into that Serbian quarter-final who else sensibly had the drought of American champions on the brain?

Fritz, twenty-eight, is ranked number four in the world starting the upcoming year-end championships and has secured his last six matches over No 3 Alexander Zverev with increasing ease. It's likely he could claim that position for himself in the coming years. But it’s clear that at present, that is as far as he can climb: The Italian and Spaniard sit a vast gap of ranking points away. Fritz’s top-class serve and powerful strength on both forehand and backhand are sufficiently adequate to dispose of most opponents on the ATP tour. When facing the handful of once-in-a-lifetime players, though, Fritz is often overmatched. The past few seasons has seen the curious rise of lanky, towering players who can nevertheless cover the court with the alarming quickness and grace of smaller men. Fritz is 6ft 5ins and appears that way. His footwork is stiff, as if he’s still getting used to his legs. So he’ll rarely steal a point that the other player was controlling, and hitting a drop shot versus him is usually a safe bet. That acts as a quite harsh restriction on his potential.

Fritz has achieved a number of significant, unexpected improvements throughout his career. Early on of the ten-year period, he was circling the bottom of the world's best thirty. Two years later, he was sniffing the elite ten. Last year, he suddenly surged to No 4 – and held the position. But the next leap, competing against and defeating all-time-greats like the young Spaniard, the Italian, and even a declining Djokovic, is the toughest of all. What was Fowler thinking? That Fritz, in 2025, was a legitimate contender to beat them all back-to-back? That it was appropriate mentioning the ongoing slump of US male players winning major titles when Fritz had departed the New York major in the quarter-finals? The thirst is just excessive and the appreciation for the magnitude of the challenge insufficient.

The American's play in that very last eight match ought to have been enough of an indication. The Serbian triumphed in four sets, a victory that only felt uncertain for moments towards the conclusion, when the American had saved a couple championship opportunities and had a opportunity to maintain serve for 5-5. The pair looked evenly matched during the rallies, with the American creating plenty of opportunities to break. But the champion saved break point after break point, prolonging the streak to the point of agony. When he finally did convert one of the opportunities at 5-5 in the middle stanza, he immediately played a horrendous service game to lose his own serve once more; the Serbian had drawn him into a skirmish secondary to the real battle and forced him to use excessive effort to win it. Down match points in the last game, his primary delivery sailed to heaven. He extended the match two times on his second serve, but finally double-faulted. It was not a choke, I didn’t think, just a result of having to hit an excessive number of weaker deliveries.

The match was quite ironclad evidence that Fritz is not good enough to defeat any form of Djokovic, that lost to Alcaraz in the next round and did not especially appeared like he thought he could triumph. This is perfectly fine – Djokovic is the best player ever, and might not be at the peak of his athletic abilities now, but has developed sufficient experience and strategic intelligence to compensate for quite a bit of the drop-off. The problem is those who were anticipating the American to win, and putting pressure on him to achieve that, when he was had not accomplished anything that indicated he could.

Fritz is an valuable contributor to the tour regardless. He’s a calm, reflective voice in press conferences, exceeding almost everyone on the ATP except for Daniil Medvedev, willing to not just say his emotions or the strategy he felt decided a contest, but clarify it. That he ought to bear the brunt of the blame for the United States not produce a men's grand slam winner since Andy Roddick feels unjust. (Now that the fellow American is competing alongside him in the standings, maybe they can share that burden.)

“I’d probably dwell on it forever if I fail to do it,” Fritz informed a journalist in the summer of claiming a major. I hope he understands that he’s not unsuccessful if he doesn’t achieve that goal, that overcoming Alcaraz and Sinner’s dominant, formidable reign is actually highly unlikely for everybody else. {