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

I have some opinions regarding the remarks made by the sports network commentator Chris Fowler after Novak Djokovic's victory over Taylor Fritz during the New York major quarter-finals. Consider – Fritz is American, the commentator is American – and athletic competitions frequently lend themselves to patriotic sentiment. A little bit of disappointment was appropriate. Rather, he invoked the ongoing absence of US male players at the majors: not one of them has won a trophy since the last American champion in 2003, and he had been the final representative in the tournament.

Everyone enjoy a narrative, me too. But come on. Even if the American had beaten Djokovic for the first time, force of nature Carlos Alcaraz was waiting in the next round, whom Fritz has yet to beat in an competitive encounter. And if he’d someway gotten past that, it would have been defending champion the Italian, against whom the American had lost 10 of the previous eleven sets. Alcaraz and Sinner had also divided the previous seven major titles (and the Spaniard proceeded to thrash a fatigued Serbian in the next round). He stated in post-match interviews after the loss that he in fact preferred his draw, because it presented the chance to defeat the three best players in the world back-to-back. He is well justified to aim for the accomplishment; an athlete is meant to believe in themselves. But going into that Serbian last eight match what other person in their right mind had the drought of American champions in mind?

The American, 28, is ranked fourth in the global rankings entering this week’s ATP World Tour Finals and has secured his last six encounters over third-ranked Alexander Zverev with increasing ease. It's likely he could take that spot for himself in the future. But it’s clear that right now, that’s as far as he can climb: Sinner and Alcaraz lie a vast gap of performance metrics away. His top-class serve and powerful power on both front side and backhand are more than enough to dispose of the majority of opponents on the professional circuit. Against the select few once-in-a-lifetime players, however, Fritz is often overmatched. The past few years has seen the curious emergence of lanky, towering athletes who can nonetheless move around with the surprising quickness and grace of smaller players. Fritz is 6ft 5ins and appears that way. 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 drop shot against him is usually a reliable tactic. That serves as a pretty harsh limitation on his upside.

Fritz has achieved a number of dramatic, improbable advancements throughout his career. At the beginning of the decade, he was circling the lower end of the world's best thirty. Two years after, he was sniffing the elite ten. The previous season, he suddenly exploded up to fourth place – and held the position. But the next leap, mixing it up with and beating all-time-greats like the young Spaniard, Sinner, and including a aging Djokovic, is the highest of all. What could 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 Fritz had departed the New York major in the quarter-finals? The thirst is simply too much and the appreciation for the magnitude of the challenge too little.

The American's play in that very last eight match should have been sufficient of an indication. The Serbian won in four rounds, a victory that only seemed tenuous for moments towards the very end, when the American had survived a few match points and had a opportunity to hold for 5-5. The duo looked well-balanced during the exchanges, with Fritz creating plenty of chances to win the opponent's serve. But the champion rescued break point after service break opportunity, extending the streak to the brink of frustration. When Fritz eventually did claim one of the chances at 5-5 in the middle stanza, he immediately played a terrible game to lose his own serve again; the Serbian had lulled him into a skirmish secondary to the real battle and compelled him to use far too much effort to win it. Facing match points in the last game, his first serve floated to heaven. He extended the contest two times on his backup delivery, but finally committed two errors. It was not a collapse, I didn’t think, just a consequence of needing to hit too many weaker deliveries.

The contest was quite compelling evidence that Fritz is insufficiently skilled to defeat any version of the Serbian, that was defeated by the Spaniard in the next round and never especially appeared like he believed he could triumph. This is absolutely fine – Djokovic is the best player ever, and might not be at the height of his athletic abilities anymore, but has acquired enough knowledge and tactical know-how to make up for quite a bit of the drop-off. The issue is the individuals who were anticipating Fritz to win, and putting pressure on him to do so, when he was had not done anything that suggested he would.

The American is an asset to the circuit nonetheless. He’s a calm, reflective presence in press conferences, more so than almost everyone on the men's tour aside from Daniil Medvedev, willing to not only say how he feels or the strategy he felt decided a contest, but clarify it. That he ought to shoulder the majority of the responsibility for the United States not produce a men's grand slam winner since the last American titlist seems unjust. (Now that Ben Shelton is rubbing shoulders with him in the standings, perhaps they can share that burden.)

“I would likely think about it forever if I don’t do it,” the American told an interviewer in June of claiming a grand slam. I hope he realizes that he’s not unsuccessful if he doesn’t achieve that objective, that breaking through Alcaraz and Sinner’s dominant, formidable reign is in fact extremely unlikely for all other players. {