US Men's Grand Slam Dry Spell Is Not Taylor Fritz's Responsibility to Carry

I possess a few thoughts regarding the comments delivered by the sports network broadcaster a well-known announcer after the Serbian champion's victory over the American player during the US Open quarter-finals. Consider – Fritz is the United States, Fowler is from the US – and sports often encourage nationalism. Some disappointment would have been appropriate. Rather, Fowler invoked the ongoing absence of US male players at grand slam tournaments: none of them had lifted a title since Andy Roddick in 2003, and Fritz had been the last one standing in the competition.

We all enjoy a narrative, myself included. But come on. Suppose Fritz defeated Djokovic for the first time, phenomenal talent Carlos Alcaraz was looming in the following match, who he has never defeated in an competitive encounter. And if he’d someway survived that, it would have been title holder Jannik Sinner, versus him Fritz had lost 10 of the last 11 sets. Alcaraz and Sinner had also divided the last seven grand slams (plus Alcaraz went on to thrash a tired Serbian in the subsequent match). Fritz said in press after the loss that he actually preferred his path, because it offered the opportunity to defeat the three best competitors in the world back-to-back. He is more than justified to aim for the accomplishment; an competitor is meant to believe in themselves. But going into that Serbian last eight match what other person sensibly had the lack of US winners in mind?

The American, twenty-eight, is ranked fourth in the world entering this week’s ATP World Tour Finals and has won his previous six encounters over No 3 the German with growing comfort. 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 rise: The Italian and Spaniard lie a vast gap of ranking points away. Fritz’s elite delivery and concussive power on each front side and backhand are sufficiently enough to defeat the majority of rivals on the ATP tour. Against the select few once-in-a-lifetime players, however, he is often helpless. The past few seasons has seen the curious emergence of lanky, towering athletes who can nonetheless move around with the alarming quickness and fluidity of smaller players. Fritz is 6ft 5ins and looks it. His movement is stiff, as if he’s still getting used to his limbs. So he seldom win a rally that the other player was controlling, and playing a soft shot against him is typically a safe bet. That acts as a quite severe restriction on his upside.

Fritz has made a number of dramatic, unexpected improvements over the years. Early on of the ten-year period, he was circling the lower end of the top 30. 24 months after, he was approaching the elite ten. The previous season, he suddenly exploded to fourth place – and held the spot. But the next leap, competing against and defeating all-time-greats like Alcaraz, Sinner, and even a aging Serbian, is the highest of all. What was Fowler thinking? That Fritz, in 2025, was a legitimate contender to beat them all back-to-back? That it was appropriate mentioning the ongoing drought of US male players lifting major titles when he had departed the New York major in the quarter-finals? The thirst is simply excessive and the appreciation for the difficulty of the challenge insufficient.

Fritz’s performance in that exact last eight match should have been sufficient of an indication. The Serbian won in four rounds, a victory that only felt tenuous for moments towards the conclusion, 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 earning numerous chances to break. But Djokovic saved break point after break point, prolonging the run to the brink of agony. When he finally did claim a single of the opportunities at 5-5 in the second set, he promptly produced a horrendous service game to drop serve once more; the Serbian had drawn him into a skirmish secondary to the main contest and compelled him to expend excessive energy to win it. Down match points in the last game, Fritz’s primary delivery sailed to heaven. He prolonged the contest twice on his backup delivery, but ultimately committed two errors. It wasn’t a collapse, in my opinion, just a result of having to hit too many second serves.

The contest was fairly ironclad proof that the American is insufficiently skilled to beat any form of Djokovic, that lost to Alcaraz in the next round and never especially appeared like he thought he could triumph. This is absolutely acceptable – Djokovic is the greatest of all time, and might not be at the height of his physical powers anymore, but has acquired sufficient knowledge and strategic intelligence to compensate for a significant portion of the decline. The issue is the individuals who were anticipating the American to prevail, and putting pressure on him to achieve that, when he was had not accomplished anything that suggested he could.

Fritz is an asset to the tour nonetheless. He’s a calm, thoughtful voice in media sessions, more so than almost everyone on the men's tour aside from the Russian star, willing to not just say how he feels or the strategy he felt decided a contest, but explain it. That he should shoulder the majority of the responsibility for the United States failing to produce a male major champion since Andy Roddick seems unjust. (Now that Ben Shelton is competing alongside him in the rankings, perhaps they can share that burden.)

“I would likely dwell on it forever if I don’t accomplish it,” Fritz informed a journalist in June of claiming a major. I hope he understands that he’s not unsuccessful if he doesn’t fulfill that goal, that breaking through Alcaraz and Sinner’s dominant, formidable reign is actually extremely improbable for everybody else. {