US Men's Grand Slam Dry Spell Isn't Fritz's Burden to Carry

I possess a few opinions regarding the remarks made by ESPN broadcaster Chris Fowler after the Serbian champion's win over the American player in the New York major last eight. Look – Fritz is American, Fowler is from the US – and sports often lend themselves to patriotic sentiment. A little bit of letdown was appropriate. Instead, he invoked the ongoing drought of US male players at grand slam tournaments: none of them had lifted a trophy since Andy Roddick in 2003, and Fritz had been the last one standing in the tournament.

Everyone love a narrative, myself included. But really. Suppose the American had beaten Djokovic for the first time, force of nature the Spanish star was waiting in the following match, whom Fritz has never defeated in an official match. And had he someway gotten past that, it would have been title holder Jannik Sinner, versus him Fritz had dropped 10 of the previous eleven sets. The two young stars had also split the previous seven major titles (and the Spaniard proceeded to thrash a fatigued Djokovic in the subsequent match). He stated in post-match interviews after the loss that he in fact preferred his draw, because it offered the opportunity to defeat the top three players in the world back-to-back. Fritz is more than justified to aspire to the achievement; an athlete is supposed to have faith in themselves. But entering that Djokovic quarter-final who else sensibly had the drought of US winners on the brain?

The American, 28, is placed number four in the world entering the upcoming year-end championships and has secured his previous six matches over No 3 the German with increasing ease. It's likely he could claim that position for himself in the future. But it’s clear that right now, that is as far as he can rise: The Italian and Spaniard sit a vast gap of performance metrics away. His elite serve and powerful power on both forehand and backhand are more than enough to dispose of the majority of opponents on the ATP tour. When facing the select few once-in-a-lifetime players, however, he is often overmatched. The past few years has seen the interesting rise of lanky, towering athletes who can nevertheless cover the court with the alarming speed and grace of smaller men. He is six-foot-five and appears that way. His footwork is stiff, as if he hasn't fully adapted to his legs. So he seldom steal a point that the other player was dictating, and playing a soft shot against him is typically a reliable tactic. That serves as a quite severe restriction on his upside.

Fritz has achieved a several significant, unexpected advancements 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 top 10. The previous season, he unexpectedly surged to No 4 – and maintained the position. But the next leap, competing against and beating all-time-greats like the young Spaniard, Sinner, and including a declining Serbian, is the highest of all. What was Fowler thinking? That the American, in 2025, was a legitimate contender to beat them all back-to-back? That it was worth commenting on the ongoing drought of US male players lifting major titles when Fritz had departed the US Open in the quarter-finals? The thirst is simply too much and the appreciation for the magnitude of the task too little.

The American's play in that very quarter-final should have been sufficient of an sign. The Serbian won in four sets, a win that only felt uncertain for moments towards the very end, when the American had survived a few championship opportunities and had a chance to maintain serve for 5-5. The pair appeared evenly matched during the rallies, with the American earning plenty of chances to win the opponent's serve. But the champion saved service break opportunity after break point, extending the streak to the point of frustration. When Fritz finally did convert a single of the opportunities at 5-5 in the second set, he immediately played a horrendous service game to drop serve once more; Djokovic had drawn him into a battle peripheral to the main contest and forced him to use excessive energy to prevail. Facing set points in the final game, Fritz’s primary delivery floated to the sky. He extended the contest two times on his second serve, but ultimately double-faulted. It wasn’t a choke, I didn’t think, only a result of needing to hit an excessive number of second serves.

The match was quite ironclad proof that the American is not good enough to defeat any form of Djokovic, that was defeated by the Spaniard in the next round and never especially appeared like he believed he could triumph. This is perfectly fine – the Serbian is the best player ever, and might not be at the height of his physical powers now, but has acquired sufficient experience and strategic intelligence to compensate for a significant portion of the decline. The issue is the individuals who were anticipating Fritz to win, 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 circuit nonetheless. He’s a patient, thoughtful voice in media sessions, more so than almost anyone on the men's tour except for the Russian star, prepared to not only express how he feels or the tactic he believed decided a match, but clarify it. That he ought to bear the brunt of the blame for America failing to spawn a men's grand slam winner since Andy Roddick seems unjust. (Now that the fellow American is rubbing shoulders with him in the rankings, perhaps they can divide that burden.)

“I’d probably dwell on it indefinitely if I fail to do it,” Fritz told an interviewer in the summer of winning a grand slam. I hope he understands that he’s not a failure if he does not fulfill that objective, that overcoming the Spanish and Italian's young, terrifying empire is in fact highly unlikely for everybody else. {