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

I have a few opinions about the comments delivered by ESPN commentator a well-known announcer after Novak Djokovic's win over the American player in the US Open last eight. Consider – the athlete represents American, Fowler is from the US – and athletic competitions often encourage patriotic sentiment. Some letdown was understandable. Instead, Fowler invoked the continued drought of US male players at grand slam tournaments: none of them had lifted a trophy since the last American champion in 2003, and Fritz had been the final representative in the tournament.

Everyone enjoy a narrative, me too. But come on. Suppose Fritz defeated the legend for the initial occasion, force of nature the Spanish star was waiting in the following match, who Fritz has yet to beat in an competitive encounter. And had he somehow gotten past that, it would have been title holder Jannik Sinner, against whom Fritz had dropped 10 of the previous eleven sets. The two young stars had also split the previous seven major titles (and the Spaniard went on to defeat a tired Serbian in the next round). He said in post-match interviews following his defeat that he actually preferred his path, because it offered the chance to defeat the top three competitors in the world back-to-back. He is well within his right to aspire to the accomplishment; an competitor is meant to believe in themselves. But going into that Djokovic quarter-final what other person sensibly had the drought of US winners in mind?

The American, 28, is placed fourth in the world starting this week’s ATP World Tour Finals and has secured his previous six matches over third-ranked the German with growing comfort. It's likely he might take that spot for himself in the future. But evidently that at present, that is as far as he can rise: The Italian and Spaniard lie a vast gap of ranking points away. His top-class serve and concussive power on both forehand and reverse side are sufficiently enough to dispose of the majority of opponents on the professional circuit. When facing the handful of once-in-a-lifetime players, though, Fritz is often helpless. The last several years has witnessed the interesting rise of lanky, towering players who can nevertheless cover the court with the alarming speed and fluidity of much shorter men. Fritz is 6ft 5ins and looks it. His footwork is rigid, as if he hasn't fully adapted to his limbs. So he seldom win a rally that the other player was dictating, and playing a drop shot against him is typically a safe bet. That serves as a quite harsh restriction on his potential.

The American has achieved a number of significant, improbable improvements over the years. Early on of the decade, he was hovering around the bottom of the top 30. Two years after, he was approaching the top 10. The previous season, he suddenly surged to fourth place – and held the spot. But the next leap, competing against and defeating all-time-greats like the young Spaniard, Sinner, and including a declining Serbian, is the highest of all. What could the commentator thinking? That the American, in 2025, was a serious threat to beat them all back-to-back? That it was worth mentioning the continuing drought of American men lifting major titles when Fritz had departed the New York major in the quarter-finals? The desperation is simply excessive and the appreciation for the magnitude of the task insufficient.

The American's play in that very quarter-final should have been sufficient of an indication. The Serbian won in four sets, a win that only seemed uncertain for brief periods towards the conclusion, when Fritz had survived a few match points and had a opportunity to maintain serve for 5-5. The duo looked well-balanced during the rallies, with Fritz earning plenty of chances to break. But Djokovic saved service break opportunity after service break opportunity, prolonging the streak to the point of frustration. When Fritz 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; Djokovic had lulled him into a skirmish peripheral to the real battle and forced him to expend far too much energy to win it. Facing set points in the last game, Fritz’s first serve floated to the sky. He extended the contest twice on his backup delivery, but ultimately committed two errors. It was not a choke, in my opinion, only a result of needing to hit an excessive number of second serves.

The match was fairly compelling evidence that Fritz is insufficiently skilled to defeat any version of Djokovic, that lost to the Spaniard in the following match and did not particularly seem like he believed he could triumph. This is absolutely fine – Djokovic is the greatest of all time, and may not be at the peak of his physical powers now, but has acquired enough knowledge and tactical know-how to make up for quite a bit of the decline. The issue is those who were anticipating the American to win, and pressuring him to do so, when he was had not accomplished anything that indicated he could.

The American is an valuable contributor to the circuit nonetheless. He’s a patient, reflective presence in press conferences, more so than virtually anyone on the men's tour except for the Russian star, willing to not only express his emotions or the strategy he felt determined a contest, but clarify it. That he should bear the brunt of the responsibility for America failing to spawn a men's grand slam winner since Andy Roddick seems unfair. (Now that Ben Shelton is rubbing shoulders with him in the rankings, perhaps they can divide that burden.)

“I would likely dwell on it indefinitely if I don’t do it,” Fritz informed an interviewer in June of winning a grand slam. I hope he realizes that he’s not unsuccessful if he does not achieve that objective, that overcoming the Spanish and Italian's dominant, formidable reign is in fact highly unlikely for everybody else. {