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

I possess some opinions about the remarks delivered by ESPN broadcaster a well-known announcer following Novak Djokovic's win over the American player during the US Open last eight. Look – the athlete represents the United States, the commentator is from the US – and athletic competitions frequently lend themselves to patriotic sentiment. A little bit of disappointment would have been appropriate. Rather, he invoked the continued drought of US male players at the majors: none of them has won a title since the last American champion in 2003, and he had been the final representative in the competition.

We all love a storyline, myself included. But really. Even if the American had beaten Djokovic for the first time, force of nature the Spanish star was waiting in the next round, who Fritz has never defeated in an official match. And had he somehow gotten past that, it would have been defending champion Jannik Sinner, versus him the American had dropped 10 of the last 11 sets. The two young stars had also divided the previous seven grand slams (and the Spaniard proceeded to defeat a tired Djokovic in the next round). Fritz stated in post-match interviews after the loss that he actually liked his draw, because it offered the opportunity to defeat the three best players in the world in succession. He is well within his right to aim for the achievement; an competitor is meant to have faith in themselves. But entering that Serbian quarter-final what other person sensibly had the drought of American champions on the brain?

The American, 28, is placed number four in the global rankings starting the upcoming year-end championships and has secured his last six matches over third-ranked Alexander Zverev with growing comfort. It's likely he could take that spot for himself in the coming years. But it’s clear that at present, that is as high as he can rise: The Italian and Spaniard lie a chasm of ranking points away. His top-class serve and concussive power on both front side and backhand are more than enough to defeat most rivals on the professional circuit. Against the select few once-in-a-lifetime players, though, he is frequently helpless. The past few years has witnessed the curious emergence of tall, gangly players who can nevertheless move around with the alarming speed and grace of much shorter men. Fritz is six-foot-five and appears that way. His movement is stiff, as if he’s still getting used to his limbs. So he seldom steal a point that the other player was controlling, and hitting a soft shot against him is typically a safe bet. That acts as a quite harsh restriction on his potential.

Fritz has made a several dramatic, unexpected advancements throughout his career. Early on of the ten-year period, he was circling the lower end of the world's best thirty. 24 months after, he was approaching the top 10. Last year, he unexpectedly exploded to fourth place – and held the position. But the subsequent step, competing against and defeating all-time-greats like the young Spaniard, Sinner, and including a declining Serbian, is the toughest of all. What could the commentator have been thinking? That the American, in 2025, was a legitimate contender to beat them all back-to-back? That it was worth commenting on the continuing slump of US male players winning major titles when Fritz had departed the US Open in the quarter-finals? The thirst is just excessive and the respect for the magnitude of the challenge insufficient.

Fritz’s play in that exact quarter-final ought to have been enough of an indication. The Serbian triumphed in four rounds, a victory that only seemed uncertain for brief periods towards the conclusion, when the American had saved a few championship opportunities and had a chance to maintain serve for 5-5. The pair appeared evenly matched during the exchanges, with the American earning numerous chances to break. But the champion rescued break point after service break opportunity, extending the run to the brink of frustration. When he eventually did convert a single of the chances at 5-5 in the second set, he immediately played a horrendous game to drop serve again; the Serbian had lulled him into a battle secondary to the real battle and forced him to expend far too much effort to prevail. Down set points in the last game, Fritz’s primary delivery sailed to the sky. He prolonged the contest two times on his backup delivery, but ultimately double-faulted. It wasn’t a choke, in my opinion, only a consequence of having to hit an excessive number of second serves.

The match was quite ironclad proof that Fritz is not good enough to defeat any form of Djokovic, who lost to the Spaniard in the next round and never particularly appeared like he believed he could triumph. This is perfectly acceptable – the Serbian is the best player ever, and may not be at the height of his physical powers now, but has acquired sufficient knowledge and tactical know-how to make up for a significant portion of the decline. The problem is the individuals who were expecting Fritz to win, and pressuring him to do so, when he was yet to done anything that indicated he would.

Fritz is an valuable contributor to the tour nonetheless. He’s a patient, thoughtful voice in press conferences, more so than almost everyone on the ATP aside from the Russian star, prepared to not only say how he feels or the strategy he felt decided a contest, but explain it. That he should bear the brunt of the blame for the United States not spawn a men's grand slam winner since Andy Roddick feels unjust. (Now that the fellow American is rubbing shoulders with him in the rankings, perhaps they can divide that load.)

“I’d probably think about it indefinitely if I don’t do it,” Fritz informed a journalist in June of winning a grand slam. It is hoped he realizes that he’s not a failure if he does not achieve that goal, that breaking through the Spanish and Italian's dominant, formidable empire is actually extremely unlikely for everybody else. {