US Men's Grand Slam Drought Isn't Fritz's Responsibility to Bear

I possess a few opinions regarding the remarks delivered by ESPN broadcaster Chris Fowler following the Serbian champion's victory over the American player in the US Open last eight. Look – the athlete represents American, the commentator is American – and athletic competitions often lend themselves to patriotic sentiment. A little bit of letdown would have been understandable. Rather, Fowler brought up the ongoing drought of American men at grand slam tournaments: not one of them has won a trophy since the last American champion in 2003, and Fritz had been the last one standing in the tournament.

Everyone love a narrative, me too. But come on. Even if the American defeated the legend for the first time, phenomenal talent the Spanish star was looming in the following match, who he has never defeated in an competitive encounter. And had he somehow survived that, it would have been title holder the Italian, versus him Fritz had dropped 10 of the last 11 sets. The two young stars had also split the previous seven major titles (plus the Spaniard proceeded to thrash a tired Serbian in the subsequent match). Fritz stated in press following his defeat that he in fact preferred his draw, because it presented the opportunity to defeat the top three competitors in the sport back-to-back. Fritz is well justified to aim for the accomplishment; an competitor is meant to believe in themselves. But entering that Serbian last eight match who else sensibly had the drought of American champions on the brain?

The American, twenty-eight, is ranked fourth in the world entering this week’s ATP World Tour Finals and has secured his previous six encounters over third-ranked Alexander Zverev with increasing ease. Presumably he might claim that position for himself in the coming years. But it’s clear that at present, that is as high as he can climb: Sinner and Alcaraz sit a chasm of performance metrics away. Fritz’s top-class delivery and concussive strength on both front side and backhand are sufficiently enough to defeat the majority of opponents on the professional circuit. Against the handful of generational talents, however, he is frequently overmatched. The last several years has seen the curious rise of lanky, towering players who can nonetheless cover the court with the alarming speed and grace of smaller players. Fritz is six-foot-five and appears that way. His footwork is rigid, as if he’s still getting used to his legs. So he’ll rarely win a rally that the other player was controlling, and hitting a drop shot versus him is typically a reliable tactic. That acts as a pretty severe restriction on his potential.

The American has achieved a number of dramatic, unexpected advancements throughout his career. Early on of the decade, he was hovering around the lower end of the top 30. 24 months after, he was approaching the elite ten. Last year, he unexpectedly surged up to fourth place – and held the spot. But the subsequent step, mixing it up with and defeating legendary figures like the young Spaniard, the Italian, and even a declining Djokovic, is the toughest of all. What could the commentator have been thinking? That Fritz, in 2025, was a serious threat to defeat them all back-to-back? That it was worth commenting on the continuing drought of US male players winning major titles when Fritz had departed the New York major in the quarter-finals? The thirst is simply excessive and the respect for the magnitude of the task too little.

Fritz’s performance in that exact last eight match ought to have been sufficient of an indication. Djokovic won in four rounds, a win that only seemed tenuous for moments towards the conclusion, when Fritz had survived a few match points and had a opportunity to hold for 5-5. The pair appeared evenly matched during the rallies, with the American earning numerous chances to break. But Djokovic rescued service break opportunity after service break opportunity, extending the run to the point of agony. When Fritz eventually did claim one of the chances at 5-5 in the middle stanza, he immediately played a terrible game to drop serve again; Djokovic had drawn him into a battle peripheral to the main contest and forced him to use excessive effort to win it. Down set points in the last game, Fritz’s first serve floated to the sky. He extended the contest twice on his backup delivery, but ultimately committed two errors. It was not a choke, I didn’t think, only a consequence of having to hit an excessive number of second serves.

The contest was fairly ironclad proof that Fritz is insufficiently skilled to defeat any version of Djokovic, who was defeated by Alcaraz in the following match and did not particularly appeared like he believed he could win. This is perfectly fine – the Serbian is the greatest of all time, and may not be at the height of his athletic abilities now, but has acquired enough knowledge and strategic intelligence to compensate for quite a bit of the decline. The issue is those who were expecting Fritz to prevail, and putting pressure on him to do so, when he was yet to done anything that indicated he could.

The American is an valuable contributor to the circuit nonetheless. He’s a patient, thoughtful presence in media sessions, more so than almost anyone on the ATP except for Daniil Medvedev, prepared to not only say how he feels or the strategy he believed determined a contest, but clarify it. That he should shoulder the majority of the blame for the United States failing to spawn a male major champion since the last American titlist feels unjust. (Now that Ben Shelton is competing alongside him in the rankings, maybe they can divide that burden.)

“I would likely think about it forever if I don’t do it,” the American informed a journalist in the summer of claiming a major. I hope he realizes that he’s not unsuccessful if he does not fulfill that goal, that breaking through Alcaraz and Sinner’s dominant, formidable reign is in fact extremely unlikely for all other players. {