US Male Grand Slam Drought Is Not Fritz's Responsibility to Carry

I have a few opinions regarding the comments delivered by the sports network broadcaster Chris Fowler after the Serbian champion's victory over the American player in the US Open last eight. Consider – the athlete represents the United States, Fowler is from the US – and athletic competitions often lend themselves to patriotic sentiment. Some letdown was appropriate. Rather, Fowler brought up the continued drought of American men at the majors: not one of them had lifted a trophy since Andy Roddick in 2003, and Fritz had been the last one standing in the competition.

We all enjoy a storyline, me too. But really. Suppose Fritz defeated the legend for the first time, phenomenal talent Carlos Alcaraz was looming in the next round, whom Fritz has yet to beat in an official match. And if he’d someway survived that, it would have been defending champion the Italian, against whom Fritz had dropped 10 of the previous eleven sets. Alcaraz and Sinner had also split the last seven grand slams (plus Alcaraz went on to thrash a tired Serbian in the next round). Fritz stated in press after the loss that he in fact liked his path, because it offered the chance to defeat the three best competitors in the world in succession. He is more than justified to aim for the achievement; an competitor is supposed to have faith in themselves. But going into that Serbian quarter-final what other person sensibly had the lack of American champions on the brain?

The American, twenty-eight, is ranked number four in the global rankings starting the upcoming ATP World Tour Finals and has won his last six matches over third-ranked the German with increasing ease. It's likely he might take that spot for himself in the future. But evidently that right now, that’s as far as he can climb: Sinner and Alcaraz sit a vast gap of performance metrics away. His top-class serve and concussive strength on each forehand and backhand are sufficiently adequate to defeat most rivals on the professional circuit. Against the handful of once-in-a-lifetime players, however, Fritz is frequently helpless. The past few seasons has witnessed the curious emergence of tall, gangly players who can nonetheless move around with the alarming quickness and fluidity of smaller players. He is 6ft 5ins and looks it. His footwork is stiff, as if he hasn't fully adapted 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 serves as a quite harsh restriction on his potential.

Fritz has achieved a number of dramatic, unexpected improvements over the years. Early on of the decade, he was circling the bottom of the top 30. 24 months after, he was approaching the elite ten. Last year, he suddenly exploded to fourth place – and held the spot. But the next leap, competing against and defeating legendary figures like the young Spaniard, Sinner, and including a aging Djokovic, is the highest of all. What could Fowler thinking? That the American, in 2025, was a legitimate contender to beat them all back-to-back? That it was worth mentioning the continuing drought of American men winning grand slams when he had exited the US Open in the quarter-finals? The thirst is just excessive and the respect for the magnitude of the challenge too little.

Fritz’s play in that very quarter-final should have been sufficient of an sign. Djokovic triumphed in four rounds, a win that only seemed tenuous for brief periods towards the very end, when the American had saved a couple championship opportunities and had a opportunity to hold for 5-5. The pair looked well-balanced during the exchanges, with Fritz earning plenty of opportunities to win the opponent's serve. But the champion rescued service break opportunity after service break opportunity, prolonging the run to the brink of agony. When Fritz finally did convert one of the chances at 5-5 in the middle stanza, he immediately produced a horrendous service game to lose his own serve again; Djokovic had drawn him into a skirmish peripheral to the main contest and forced him to use far too much effort to prevail. Facing set points in the last game, Fritz’s first serve sailed to heaven. He extended the match twice on his backup delivery, but ultimately committed two errors. It was not a collapse, I didn’t think, only a consequence of having to hit an excessive number of second serves.

The contest was quite compelling evidence that Fritz is not good enough to beat any version of Djokovic, that lost to the Spaniard in the next round and did not particularly seem like he thought he could win. This is perfectly acceptable – Djokovic is the best player ever, and may not be at the height of his athletic abilities now, but has developed enough experience and tactical know-how to make up for quite a bit of the drop-off. The problem is the individuals who were anticipating the American to prevail, and pressuring him to achieve that, when he was yet to done anything that suggested he could.

The American is an valuable contributor to the circuit nonetheless. He’s a calm, thoughtful voice in press conferences, exceeding virtually anyone on the ATP except for Daniil Medvedev, prepared to not only express his emotions or the tactic he believed decided a match, but explain it. That he should shoulder the majority of the blame for the United States failing to spawn a men's grand slam winner since Andy Roddick feels unjust. (Now that Ben Shelton is competing alongside him in the standings, maybe they can divide that burden.)

“I’d probably think about it indefinitely if I don’t do it,” Fritz informed an interviewer in the summer of winning a grand slam. I hope he realizes that he’s not unsuccessful if he does not achieve that objective, that overcoming the Spanish and Italian's dominant, formidable reign is in fact extremely unlikely for everybody else. {