US Men's Grand Slam Dry Spell Isn't Taylor Fritz's Responsibility to Bear

I possess some opinions regarding that remarks delivered by the sports network broadcaster Chris Fowler after the Serbian champion's victory over the American player during the US Open quarter-finals. Look – the athlete represents the United States, Fowler is from the US – and sports frequently lend themselves to patriotic sentiment. A little bit of letdown was appropriate. Rather, Fowler invoked the continued drought of US male players at the majors: not one of them has won a title since Andy Roddick in 2003, and Fritz had been the final representative in the tournament.

We all enjoy a narrative, myself included. But come on. Even if Fritz had beaten Djokovic for the initial occasion, force of nature Carlos Alcaraz was looming in the following match, who he has never defeated in an competitive encounter. And if he’d somehow gotten past that, it would have been defending champion the Italian, versus him the American had dropped 10 of the last 11 sets. The two young stars had also split the previous seven major titles (plus Alcaraz proceeded to defeat a tired Djokovic in the subsequent match). He stated in press following his defeat that he in fact liked his draw, because it presented the opportunity to defeat the top three players in the world in succession. Fritz is well within his right to aim for the accomplishment; an athlete is supposed to believe in themselves. But entering that Serbian quarter-final who else in their right mind had the lack of American champions in mind?

The American, 28, is placed number four in the global rankings entering the upcoming ATP World Tour Finals and has won his previous six encounters over No 3 the German with increasing ease. Presumably he might take that spot for himself in the future. But it’s clear that at present, that’s as high as he can rise: Sinner and Alcaraz sit a chasm of performance metrics away. Fritz’s top-class delivery and powerful power on each front side and reverse side are sufficiently adequate to dispose of the majority of opponents on the professional circuit. Against the handful of once-in-a-lifetime players, however, Fritz is frequently overmatched. The last several seasons has seen the interesting emergence of tall, gangly athletes who can nevertheless cover the court with the surprising quickness and fluidity of much shorter players. Fritz is 6ft 5ins and appears that way. His footwork is rigid, as if he’s still getting used to his legs. So he seldom win a rally that the other player was controlling, and hitting a drop shot against him is usually a reliable tactic. That acts as a quite harsh restriction on his upside.

Fritz has made a number of significant, unexpected advancements over the years. Early on of the decade, he was hovering around the lower end of the world's best thirty. Two years later, he was approaching the top 10. The previous season, he suddenly exploded up to No 4 – and maintained the spot. But the next leap, mixing it up with and defeating legendary figures like the young Spaniard, Sinner, and even a declining Serbian, is the highest of all. What was the commentator have been thinking? That the American, in 2025, was a serious threat to defeat them all back-to-back? That it was appropriate mentioning the ongoing drought of US male players winning major titles when he had departed the US Open in the quarter-finals? The thirst is simply too much and the appreciation for the difficulty of the challenge insufficient.

Fritz’s performance in that very last eight match should have been enough of an indication. The Serbian won in four rounds, a victory that only seemed tenuous for moments towards the very end, when the American had survived a couple match points and had a chance to hold for 5-5. The duo appeared well-balanced during the rallies, with the American creating numerous opportunities to win the opponent's serve. But Djokovic rescued service break opportunity after break point, prolonging the run to the brink of frustration. When he finally did claim a single of the opportunities at 5-5 in the middle stanza, he promptly produced a horrendous service game to drop serve again; the Serbian had drawn him into a battle peripheral to the real battle and forced him to expend far too much effort to prevail. Facing match points in the last game, his primary delivery floated to the sky. He extended the contest two times on his second serve, but finally double-faulted. It wasn’t a choke, in my opinion, just a consequence of having to hit an excessive number of weaker deliveries.

The match was fairly compelling proof that Fritz is not good enough to defeat any form of the Serbian, that was defeated by Alcaraz in the following match and never particularly appeared like he thought he could triumph. This is absolutely fine – the Serbian is the greatest of all time, and might not be at the height of his athletic abilities anymore, but has developed sufficient experience and tactical know-how to make up for quite a bit of the drop-off. The problem is those who were anticipating the American to prevail, and putting pressure on him to achieve that, when he was yet to done anything that indicated he could.

The American is an asset to the tour nonetheless. He’s a calm, thoughtful presence in media sessions, more so than almost everyone on the ATP aside from the Russian star, prepared to not just express how he feels or the tactic he felt decided a match, but clarify it. That he ought to shoulder the majority of the blame for the United States failing to spawn a men's grand slam winner since the last American titlist seems unjust. (Now that the fellow American is competing alongside him in the standings, perhaps they can share that burden.)

“I’d probably think about it indefinitely if I fail to accomplish it,” the American informed a journalist in June of winning a major. I hope he understands that he’s not a failure if he doesn’t achieve that goal, that breaking through Alcaraz and Sinner’s young, terrifying reign is actually extremely unlikely for all other players. {