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

I possess a few opinions regarding the comments delivered by ESPN commentator Chris Fowler after Novak Djokovic's win over the American player during the US Open last eight. Look – the athlete represents the United States, the commentator is American – and sports frequently lend themselves to patriotic sentiment. A little bit of disappointment would have been understandable. Rather, Fowler invoked the continued absence of US male players at grand slam tournaments: not one of them has won a trophy since Andy Roddick in 2003, and he had been the last one standing in the competition.

We all love a storyline, myself included. But really. Suppose Fritz had beaten Djokovic for the initial occasion, force of nature Carlos Alcaraz was looming in the next round, who Fritz has never defeated in an official match. And if he’d someway survived that, it would have been defending champion Jannik Sinner, against whom Fritz had lost 10 of the previous eleven sets. The two young stars had also split the previous seven grand slams (plus the Spaniard went on to thrash a fatigued Serbian in the subsequent match). Fritz stated in post-match interviews after the loss that he in fact liked his draw, because it offered the chance to defeat the top three competitors in the sport back-to-back. Fritz is well justified to aspire to the accomplishment; an athlete is meant to have faith in themselves. But going into that Serbian last eight match what other person in their right mind had the drought of US winners on the brain?

The American, 28, is placed number four in the world entering this week’s ATP World Tour Finals and has won his last six matches over No 3 Alexander Zverev with growing comfort. Presumably he might take that spot for himself in the future. But it’s clear that at present, that is as high as he can rise: Sinner and Alcaraz sit a vast gap of ranking points away. Fritz’s elite serve and powerful power on both front side and backhand are more than adequate to defeat most opponents on the ATP tour. Against the handful of once-in-a-lifetime players, though, Fritz is often helpless. The last several years has seen the curious emergence of tall, gangly players who can nonetheless cover the court with the alarming speed and fluidity of much shorter players. Fritz is 6ft 5ins and looks it. His movement is rigid, as if he’s still getting used to his legs. So he’ll rarely win a rally that the opponent was dictating, and hitting a soft shot versus him is typically a safe bet. That serves as a quite severe restriction on his potential.

Fritz has achieved a several dramatic, improbable improvements over the years. Early on of the decade, he was circling the bottom of the world's best thirty. Two years later, he was approaching the elite ten. Last year, he unexpectedly surged to No 4 – and maintained the spot. But the subsequent step, mixing it up with and beating legendary figures like the young Spaniard, the Italian, and even a aging Serbian, is the toughest of all. What could the commentator have been thinking? That Fritz, in 2025, was a legitimate contender to defeat them all back-to-back? That it was worth mentioning the ongoing slump of US male players lifting major titles when Fritz had departed the US Open in the quarter-finals? The desperation is just excessive and the respect for the magnitude of the task too little.

Fritz’s play in that very quarter-final ought to have been sufficient of an indication. The Serbian won in four rounds, a victory that only felt tenuous for brief periods towards the conclusion, when the American had saved a couple match points and had a opportunity to maintain serve for 5-5. The duo looked well-balanced during the rallies, with Fritz creating plenty of opportunities to win the opponent's serve. But the champion rescued break point after service break opportunity, prolonging the run to the brink of agony. When he eventually did convert a single of the chances at 5-5 in the middle stanza, he immediately produced a terrible game to drop serve once more; the Serbian had drawn him into a battle secondary to the real battle and compelled him to expend excessive effort to prevail. Down set points in the last game, Fritz’s primary delivery sailed to the sky. He extended the match twice on his second serve, but ultimately committed two errors. It was not a choke, I didn’t think, just a consequence of having to hit too many second serves.

The contest was fairly ironclad evidence that the American is insufficiently skilled to beat any version of the Serbian, that lost to the Spaniard in the next round and never particularly appeared like he believed he could triumph. This is absolutely fine – the Serbian is the best player ever, and may not be at the height of his athletic abilities anymore, but has developed sufficient experience and tactical know-how to compensate for a significant portion of the decline. The problem is the individuals who were expecting the American to prevail, and putting pressure on him to achieve that, when he was had not done anything that suggested he could.

Fritz is an valuable contributor to the tour regardless. He’s a patient, thoughtful voice in press conferences, more so than virtually anyone on the ATP except for the Russian star, willing to not just say his emotions or the tactic he believed decided a contest, but clarify it. That he ought to shoulder the majority of the blame for America not spawn a male major champion since Andy Roddick feels unfair. (Since the fellow American is rubbing shoulders with him in the rankings, maybe they can share that burden.)

“I would likely dwell on it forever if I fail to accomplish it,” the American told an interviewer in the summer of claiming a major. I hope he realizes that he’s not a failure if he doesn’t fulfill that objective, that breaking through the Spanish and Italian's young, terrifying empire is actually extremely improbable for all other players. {