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

I have some opinions regarding the comments delivered by the sports network commentator a well-known announcer following Novak Djokovic's win over the American player in the US Open last eight. Look – Fritz is American, Fowler is from the US – and athletic competitions often encourage nationalism. A little bit of disappointment would have been understandable. Instead, Fowler invoked the ongoing absence of American men at grand slam tournaments: not one of them had lifted a trophy since the last American champion in 2003, and he had been the last one standing in the competition.

We all enjoy a narrative, me too. But come on. Suppose Fritz defeated the legend for the first time, phenomenal talent the Spanish star was waiting in the next round, who Fritz has yet to beat in an official match. And had he somehow survived that, it would have been title holder Jannik Sinner, against whom Fritz had lost 10 of the last 11 sets. Alcaraz and Sinner had also divided the previous seven major titles (plus the Spaniard went on to thrash a tired Serbian in the next round). Fritz stated in press after the loss that he actually preferred his draw, because it presented the opportunity to defeat the three best players in the world in succession. Fritz is well justified to aspire to the accomplishment; an athlete is meant to have faith in themselves. But going into that Djokovic last eight match what other person in their right mind had the lack of American champions on the brain?

The American, 28, is ranked number four in the global rankings entering the upcoming ATP World Tour Finals and has secured his previous six encounters over third-ranked the German with increasing ease. It's likely he could take that spot for himself in the coming years. But it’s clear that right now, that’s as far as he can rise: Sinner and Alcaraz lie a chasm of ranking points away. Fritz’s top-class delivery and powerful power on each front side and reverse side are sufficiently enough to dispose of most opponents on the ATP tour. When facing the handful of generational talents, though, Fritz is often overmatched. The past few years has witnessed the curious emergence of tall, gangly players who can nevertheless move around with the surprising quickness and grace of much shorter players. Fritz is 6ft 5ins and looks it. His footwork is rigid, as if he hasn't fully adapted to his limbs. So he seldom win a rally that the opponent was controlling, and playing a drop shot versus him is usually a reliable tactic. That serves as a pretty harsh limitation on his potential.

The American has made a number of dramatic, improbable advancements throughout his career. At the beginning of the decade, he was circling the bottom of the top 30. Two years later, he was approaching the elite ten. The previous season, he suddenly surged to fourth place – and maintained the spot. But the subsequent step, competing against and defeating all-time-greats like Alcaraz, Sinner, and even a aging Djokovic, is the highest of all. What was Fowler have been thinking? That Fritz, in 2025, was a legitimate contender to defeat them all back-to-back? That it was appropriate commenting on the ongoing slump of American men winning major titles when he had departed the New York major in the quarter-finals? The thirst is just excessive and the appreciation for the magnitude of the task insufficient.

The American's play in that exact last eight match ought to have been sufficient of an sign. The Serbian won in four rounds, a victory that only felt uncertain for brief periods towards the very end, when Fritz had saved a couple championship opportunities and had a opportunity to hold for 5-5. The pair looked well-balanced during the rallies, with Fritz earning plenty of opportunities to win the opponent's serve. But Djokovic rescued break point after break point, prolonging the streak to the point of agony. When Fritz finally did claim a single of the opportunities at 5-5 in the middle stanza, he promptly produced a terrible service game to lose his own serve again; Djokovic had drawn him into a skirmish peripheral to the real battle and compelled him to use far too much effort to prevail. Facing set points in the last game, his first serve sailed to heaven. He prolonged the match two times on his second serve, but ultimately double-faulted. It was not a collapse, I didn’t think, only a consequence of needing to hit too many weaker deliveries.

The contest was quite compelling evidence that the American is not good enough to defeat any version of the Serbian, that lost to Alcaraz in the following match and did not particularly seem like he believed he could win. This is perfectly acceptable – the Serbian is the greatest of all time, and might not be at the peak of his athletic abilities now, but has acquired enough knowledge and tactical know-how to compensate for quite a bit of the decline. The problem is those who were anticipating the American to prevail, and putting pressure on him to achieve that, when he was yet to accomplished anything that indicated he could.

Fritz is an valuable contributor to the tour regardless. He’s a patient, thoughtful presence in press conferences, exceeding almost everyone on the ATP aside from the Russian star, willing to not only express how he feels or the tactic he felt decided a contest, but explain it. That he should shoulder the majority of the blame for the United States not produce a male major champion since Andy Roddick feels unfair. (Now that Ben Shelton is rubbing shoulders with him in the rankings, perhaps they can share that burden.)

“I’d probably dwell on it forever if I don’t accomplish it,” the American informed an interviewer in the summer of winning a major. It is hoped he understands that he’s not a failure if he does not achieve that objective, that breaking through the Spanish and Italian's dominant, formidable empire is in fact highly unlikely for everybody else. {