US Men's Major Title Drought Isn't Fritz's Responsibility to Carry

I have a few opinions about the comments delivered by the sports network commentator a well-known announcer following the Serbian champion's victory over Taylor Fritz during the US Open last eight. Look – Fritz is the United States, Fowler is from the US – and athletic competitions frequently lend themselves to patriotic sentiment. A little bit of letdown would have been appropriate. Instead, he invoked the continued drought of American men at grand slam tournaments: not one 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 love a narrative, me too. But really. Even if the American had beaten the legend for the initial occasion, phenomenal talent the Spanish star 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 Jannik Sinner, against whom Fritz had lost 10 of the previous eleven sets. Alcaraz and Sinner had also divided the previous seven major titles (and the Spaniard went on to thrash a tired Djokovic in the subsequent match). Fritz said in post-match interviews following his defeat that he actually preferred his path, because it presented the opportunity to beat the three best players in the sport in succession. Fritz is well within his right to aspire to the accomplishment; an competitor is meant to have faith in themselves. But going into that Djokovic last eight match what other person in their right mind had the drought of US winners in mind?

Fritz, 28, is ranked number four in the global rankings starting this week’s ATP World Tour Finals and has won his previous six encounters over third-ranked the German with increasing ease. Presumably he could take that spot for himself in the coming years. But it’s clear that at present, that’s as far as he can climb: Sinner and Alcaraz sit a vast gap of performance metrics away. Fritz’s elite delivery and powerful power on each front side and reverse side are more than enough to dispose of the majority of opponents on the professional circuit. When facing the handful of generational talents, however, Fritz is often overmatched. The last several years has seen the interesting emergence of lanky, towering athletes who can nevertheless cover the court with the surprising speed and grace of much shorter men. Fritz is 6ft 5ins and looks it. His footwork is stiff, as if he’s still getting used to his legs. So he seldom win a rally that the opponent was dictating, and hitting a drop shot against him is usually a reliable tactic. That serves as a quite severe limitation on his potential.

The American has made a number of dramatic, improbable improvements over the years. Early on of the decade, he was circling the lower end of the world's best thirty. Two years after, he was approaching the elite ten. The previous season, he unexpectedly exploded up to fourth place – and held the spot. But the next leap, mixing it up with and defeating all-time-greats like the young Spaniard, Sinner, and even a aging Djokovic, is the toughest of all. What was the commentator thinking? That the American, in 2025, was a legitimate contender to beat them all back-to-back? That it was appropriate mentioning the continuing drought of American men lifting grand slams when he had exited the New York major in the quarter-finals? The desperation is just too much and the respect for the magnitude of the challenge insufficient.

Fritz’s play in that very quarter-final should have been enough of an sign. The Serbian triumphed in four sets, a victory that only felt uncertain for moments towards the very end, when the American had survived a couple championship opportunities and had a chance to hold for 5-5. The duo looked well-balanced during the exchanges, with Fritz creating plenty of opportunities to win the opponent's serve. But the champion saved break point after service break opportunity, extending the streak to the point of agony. When he finally did claim one of the opportunities at 5-5 in the second set, he immediately played a horrendous service game to lose his own serve once more; Djokovic had lulled him into a skirmish secondary to the main contest and compelled him to use excessive energy to win it. Facing set points in the final game, his first serve sailed to heaven. He prolonged the contest two times on his backup delivery, but ultimately double-faulted. It was not a collapse, I didn’t think, only a consequence of having to hit too many second serves.

The contest was fairly compelling proof that the American is not good enough to defeat any version of Djokovic, that lost to the Spaniard in the next round and never particularly seem like he thought he could win. This is absolutely fine – the Serbian is the best player ever, and might not be at the height of his athletic abilities anymore, but has developed enough knowledge and strategic intelligence to make up for quite a bit of the decline. The issue is the individuals who were anticipating Fritz to win, and pressuring him to do so, when he was had not accomplished anything that indicated he could.

The American is an asset to the tour regardless. He’s a patient, reflective voice in media sessions, more so than almost anyone on the men's tour aside from the Russian star, willing to not just say his emotions or the tactic he believed decided a contest, but explain it. That he should bear the brunt of the responsibility for America not produce a male major champion since Andy Roddick seems unfair. (Since the fellow American is rubbing shoulders with him in the standings, maybe they can divide that load.)

“I would likely dwell on it indefinitely if I don’t do it,” Fritz told an interviewer in June of claiming a grand slam. It is hoped he realizes that he’s not a failure if he doesn’t achieve that objective, that breaking through Alcaraz and Sinner’s dominant, formidable reign is in fact extremely unlikely for all other players. {