American Men's Grand Slam Dry Spell Is Not Fritz's Burden to Carry

I have some thoughts regarding the comments made by the sports network commentator Chris Fowler after Novak Djokovic's win over Taylor Fritz in the US Open last eight. Look – the athlete represents American, Fowler is from the US – and athletic competitions often encourage nationalism. Some letdown was appropriate. Rather, he brought up the ongoing drought of US male players at the majors: none of them had lifted a title since the last American champion in 2003, and he had been the last one standing in the tournament.

Everyone enjoy a narrative, myself included. But really. Even if the American had beaten the legend for the first time, force of nature Carlos Alcaraz was looming in the following match, who he has yet to beat in an competitive encounter. And if he’d someway gotten past that, it would have been title holder the Italian, versus him Fritz had dropped 10 of the previous eleven 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 after the loss that he in fact preferred his draw, because it presented the opportunity to beat the top three competitors in the world in succession. He is well justified to aspire to the accomplishment; an competitor is supposed to believe in themselves. But entering that Serbian last eight match what other person sensibly had the lack of US winners in mind?

Fritz, twenty-eight, is placed fourth in the global rankings entering the upcoming year-end championships and has secured his last six encounters over No 3 Alexander Zverev with increasing ease. Presumably he could take that spot for himself in the coming years. But it’s clear that right now, that is as high as he can rise: Sinner and Alcaraz sit a chasm of ranking points away. His elite serve and powerful power on each forehand and backhand are sufficiently adequate to dispose of the majority of rivals on the ATP tour. When facing the handful of once-in-a-lifetime players, though, he is often helpless. The past few seasons has seen the curious emergence of lanky, towering athletes who can nevertheless move around with the alarming quickness and fluidity of smaller men. Fritz is six-foot-five and looks it. His footwork is stiff, as if he’s still getting used to his limbs. So he’ll rarely steal a point that the other player was controlling, and playing a soft shot against him is usually a reliable tactic. That acts as a pretty harsh restriction on his upside.

Fritz has achieved a several significant, improbable advancements over the years. At the beginning of the decade, he was hovering around the lower end of the top 30. 24 months later, he was approaching the elite ten. The previous season, he unexpectedly exploded to fourth place – and maintained the position. But the next leap, mixing it up with and defeating all-time-greats like the young Spaniard, Sinner, and including a aging 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 worth mentioning the continuing drought of US male players lifting major titles when Fritz had exited the US Open in the quarter-finals? The thirst is just excessive and the appreciation for the difficulty of the task insufficient.

Fritz’s play in that very quarter-final ought to have been sufficient of an indication. Djokovic won in four sets, a victory that only seemed uncertain for moments towards the conclusion, when Fritz had saved a few match points and had a opportunity to hold for 5-5. The pair appeared evenly matched during the rallies, with Fritz creating plenty of chances to break. But the champion rescued break point after service break opportunity, extending the run to the brink of agony. When Fritz finally did claim one of the chances at 5-5 in the second set, he immediately played a horrendous service game to lose his own serve again; the Serbian had lulled him into a skirmish peripheral to the main contest and forced him to use far too much effort to prevail. Down set points in the last game, his primary delivery sailed to heaven. He prolonged the contest two times on his second serve, but finally double-faulted. It was not a collapse, I didn’t think, only a result of having to hit an excessive number of second serves.

The contest was quite compelling proof that the American is not good enough to beat any version of the Serbian, who was defeated by the Spaniard in the next round and never particularly appeared like he believed he could win. This is absolutely acceptable – the Serbian is the best player ever, and may not be at the peak of his physical powers anymore, but has developed sufficient knowledge and tactical know-how to compensate for a significant portion of the decline. The issue is those who were anticipating Fritz to prevail, and putting pressure on him to do so, when he was had not done anything that indicated he would.

Fritz is an valuable contributor to the tour regardless. He’s a patient, thoughtful presence in press conferences, more so than almost anyone on the men's tour aside from the Russian star, willing to not just express how he feels or the strategy he felt determined a contest, but explain it. That he should bear the brunt of the blame for the United States failing to produce a men's grand slam winner since Andy Roddick seems unfair. (Since the fellow American is rubbing shoulders with him in the rankings, perhaps they can divide that load.)

“I’d probably think about it indefinitely if I fail to accomplish it,” Fritz told a journalist in the summer of winning a grand slam. It is hoped he understands that he’s not a failure if he doesn’t achieve that goal, that overcoming the Spanish and Italian's young, terrifying reign is in fact extremely improbable for all other players. {