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

I possess a few opinions about the comments delivered by the sports network commentator a well-known announcer after the Serbian champion's victory over Taylor Fritz during the US Open last eight. Look – the athlete represents the United States, Fowler is American – and sports frequently encourage nationalism. A little bit of disappointment would have been understandable. Rather, Fowler invoked the ongoing drought of US male players at grand slam tournaments: not one of them had lifted a title since Andy Roddick in 2003, and he had been the last one standing in the tournament.

We all enjoy a narrative, myself included. But come on. Suppose Fritz defeated Djokovic for the initial occasion, force of nature the Spanish star was looming in the next round, who Fritz has yet to beat in an competitive encounter. And if he’d somehow gotten past that, it would have been defending champion Jannik Sinner, versus him the American had dropped 10 of the last 11 sets. Alcaraz and Sinner had also split the last seven major titles (and Alcaraz proceeded to thrash a fatigued Serbian in the next round). Fritz said in press following his defeat that he actually preferred his path, because it offered the opportunity to beat the three best competitors in the sport in succession. Fritz is more than within his right to aspire to the accomplishment; an athlete is supposed to have faith in themselves. But entering that Djokovic last eight match what other person sensibly had the lack of US winners on the brain?

Fritz, 28, is placed fourth in the global rankings entering the upcoming ATP World Tour Finals and has won his previous six matches over No 3 the German with growing comfort. Presumably he might claim that position for himself in the future. But it’s clear that right now, that is as far as he can rise: Sinner and Alcaraz lie a chasm of ranking points away. Fritz’s top-class serve and concussive strength on both forehand and backhand are sufficiently adequate to dispose of the majority of opponents on the ATP tour. When facing the handful of generational talents, though, he is frequently helpless. The last several seasons has witnessed the interesting rise of lanky, towering players who can nonetheless move around with the alarming speed and fluidity of much shorter players. Fritz is six-foot-five and looks it. His footwork is stiff, as if he’s still getting used to his legs. So he’ll rarely steal a point that the opponent was dictating, and playing a drop shot versus him is typically a safe bet. That serves as a pretty harsh limitation on his potential.

Fritz has made a several significant, unexpected advancements over the years. Early on of the decade, he was circling the bottom of the world's best thirty. Two years after, he was approaching the elite ten. The previous season, he unexpectedly surged to fourth place – and held the position. But the next leap, mixing it up with and defeating all-time-greats like Alcaraz, the Italian, and even a declining Serbian, is the highest of all. What was Fowler have been thinking? That Fritz, in 2025, was a legitimate contender to beat them all back-to-back? That it was worth commenting on the continuing drought of US male players winning major titles when Fritz had exited the US Open in the quarter-finals? The thirst is just too much and the respect for the magnitude of the challenge insufficient.

The American's play in that very last eight match ought to have been enough of an sign. The Serbian won in four sets, a victory that only felt uncertain for brief periods towards the very end, when Fritz had saved a few championship opportunities and had a opportunity to maintain serve for 5-5. The pair appeared well-balanced during the rallies, with Fritz earning numerous chances to break. But the champion rescued service break opportunity after service break opportunity, extending the streak to the point of frustration. When Fritz eventually did claim a single of the chances at 5-5 in the middle stanza, he promptly produced a terrible service game to drop serve once more; Djokovic had lulled him into a skirmish secondary to the real battle and forced him to use far too much energy to prevail. Down set points in the final game, Fritz’s primary delivery floated to the sky. He extended the match twice on his backup delivery, but finally double-faulted. It wasn’t a collapse, in my opinion, only a consequence of having to hit an excessive number of second serves.

The contest was quite ironclad evidence that Fritz is insufficiently skilled to defeat any version of Djokovic, who lost to the Spaniard in the next round and never especially appeared like he thought he could triumph. This is perfectly fine – Djokovic is the greatest of all time, and might not be at the peak of his athletic abilities now, but has developed sufficient experience and tactical know-how to make up for a significant portion of the drop-off. The problem is those who were anticipating the American to prevail, and pressuring him to achieve that, when he was yet to accomplished anything that indicated he would.

Fritz is an asset to the circuit regardless. He’s a calm, reflective presence in media sessions, exceeding almost anyone on the men's tour except for the Russian star, willing to not just say his emotions or the strategy he felt decided a match, but explain it. That he should bear the brunt of the blame for America not spawn a male major champion since Andy Roddick seems unjust. (Now that Ben Shelton is competing alongside him in the standings, maybe they can divide that load.)

“I would likely think about it forever if I fail to accomplish it,” the American informed an interviewer in the summer of claiming a grand slam. I hope he realizes that he’s not unsuccessful if he doesn’t achieve that objective, that breaking through the Spanish and Italian's dominant, formidable empire is actually extremely unlikely for everybody else. {