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

I possess a few thoughts about the remarks delivered by ESPN broadcaster a well-known announcer following the Serbian champion's victory over the American player during the US Open quarter-finals. Consider – the athlete represents the United States, Fowler is American – and athletic competitions often lend themselves to nationalism. Some disappointment would have been appropriate. Rather, Fowler brought up the ongoing drought of US male players at grand slam tournaments: none of them has won a trophy since the last American champion in 2003, and Fritz had been the last one standing in the tournament.

Everyone enjoy a storyline, myself included. But really. Suppose the American defeated the legend for the initial occasion, phenomenal talent the Spanish star was looming in the next round, who he has never defeated in an competitive encounter. And if he’d someway gotten past that, it would have been defending champion the Italian, versus him the American had dropped 10 of the last 11 sets. The two young stars had also divided the last seven grand slams (and the Spaniard went on to defeat a fatigued Serbian in the subsequent match). He said in press after the loss that he actually liked his path, because it presented the opportunity to beat the top three competitors in the sport back-to-back. Fritz is more than justified to aspire to the accomplishment; an athlete is meant to believe in themselves. But entering that Serbian last eight match what other person in their right mind had the lack of American champions in mind?

The American, twenty-eight, is placed fourth in the world entering this week’s ATP World Tour Finals and has secured his previous six encounters over No 3 the German with increasing ease. Presumably he could take that spot for himself in the coming years. But it’s clear that at present, that is as far as he can rise: Sinner and Alcaraz lie a chasm of ranking points away. Fritz’s elite serve and powerful power on each front side and reverse side are more than adequate to dispose of most rivals on the ATP tour. Against the handful of generational talents, however, he is frequently helpless. The past few seasons has witnessed the interesting rise of tall, gangly athletes who can nevertheless cover the court with the alarming quickness and fluidity of smaller men. He is 6ft 5ins and looks it. His movement is stiff, as if he’s still getting used to his legs. So he seldom steal a point that the opponent was controlling, and hitting a soft shot versus him is usually a safe bet. That serves as a quite harsh restriction on his potential.

The American has made a number of dramatic, unexpected advancements throughout his career. At the beginning of the decade, he was hovering around the bottom of the world's best thirty. 24 months after, he was approaching the top 10. Last year, he unexpectedly surged up to No 4 – and maintained the position. But the next leap, competing against and defeating all-time-greats like Alcaraz, Sinner, and including a declining Serbian, is the toughest 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 commenting on the continuing slump of American men lifting grand slams when Fritz had exited the US Open in the quarter-finals? The thirst is just too much and the appreciation for the difficulty of the task insufficient.

Fritz’s play in that very quarter-final ought to have been sufficient of an indication. The Serbian triumphed in four rounds, a win that only seemed uncertain for moments towards the conclusion, when the American had saved a few match points and had a opportunity to hold for 5-5. The duo appeared well-balanced during the rallies, with the American earning plenty of chances to win the opponent's serve. But the champion rescued service break opportunity after break point, extending the run to the brink of frustration. When Fritz eventually did convert one of the opportunities at 5-5 in the second set, he immediately produced a terrible service game to lose his own serve again; Djokovic had lulled him into a skirmish secondary to the real battle and compelled him to use far too much effort to prevail. Facing match points in the last game, his primary delivery floated to heaven. He prolonged the contest two times on his backup delivery, but finally committed two errors. It wasn’t a collapse, I didn’t think, only a result of having to hit too many second serves.

The contest was fairly compelling proof that the American is not good enough to beat any version of Djokovic, who was defeated by Alcaraz in the following match and did not especially seem like he thought he could win. This is perfectly fine – Djokovic is the best player ever, and may 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 problem is the individuals who were expecting the American to win, and putting pressure on him to do so, when he was had not done anything that indicated he could.

Fritz is an valuable contributor to the tour regardless. He’s a patient, reflective presence in media sessions, more so than virtually everyone on the men's tour except for the Russian star, willing to not only express his emotions or the tactic he believed determined a contest, but explain it. That he should shoulder the majority of the blame for the United States not produce a men's grand slam winner since Andy Roddick feels unjust. (Since Ben Shelton is competing alongside him in the standings, maybe they can divide that burden.)

“I would likely think about it forever if I fail to do it,” the American told an interviewer in June of winning a major. I hope he realizes that he’s not a failure if he doesn’t fulfill that objective, that overcoming Alcaraz and Sinner’s young, terrifying empire is in fact highly unlikely for all other players. {