American Men's Grand Slam Dry Spell Isn't Fritz's Responsibility to Bear

I possess a few thoughts about that remarks delivered by ESPN commentator Chris Fowler after the Serbian champion's win over the American player during the US Open last eight. Look – Fritz is American, Fowler is from the US – and athletic competitions often encourage nationalism. A little bit of disappointment was appropriate. Rather, he brought up the continued absence of US male players at grand slam tournaments: not one of them had lifted a trophy since Andy Roddick in 2003, and he had been the final representative in the competition.

Everyone love a storyline, me too. But come on. Suppose Fritz defeated Djokovic for the first time, force of nature Carlos Alcaraz was waiting in the following match, whom Fritz has never defeated in an official match. And had he someway gotten past that, it would have been title holder Jannik Sinner, against whom the American had lost 10 of the previous eleven sets. The two young stars had also split the previous seven major titles (plus Alcaraz proceeded to thrash a tired Serbian in the next round). He stated in post-match interviews after the loss that he actually liked his path, because it offered the opportunity to defeat the top three players in the sport back-to-back. He is more than within his right to aspire to the accomplishment; an competitor is meant to believe in themselves. But entering that Serbian last eight match who else sensibly had the drought of American champions on the brain?

The American, twenty-eight, is placed fourth in the global rankings entering the upcoming ATP World Tour Finals and has secured his previous six matches over No 3 Alexander Zverev with growing comfort. Presumably he could take that spot for himself in the future. But evidently that right now, that’s as far as he can rise: The Italian and Spaniard sit a chasm of performance metrics away. His top-class delivery and powerful power on each front side and reverse side are sufficiently adequate to defeat the majority of opponents on the ATP tour. When facing the select few generational talents, though, Fritz is often overmatched. The past few years has witnessed the curious emergence of tall, gangly athletes who can nonetheless move around with the surprising quickness and grace of smaller men. Fritz is 6ft 5ins and appears that way. His footwork is rigid, as if he’s still getting used to his limbs. So he’ll rarely win a rally that the other player was dictating, and playing a drop shot versus him is usually a safe bet. That acts as a pretty harsh restriction on his potential.

The American has made a number of significant, improbable improvements throughout his career. Early on of the ten-year period, he was circling the lower end of the top 30. 24 months later, he was approaching the elite ten. The previous season, he suddenly exploded to fourth place – and maintained the position. But the subsequent step, competing against and beating legendary figures like the young Spaniard, the Italian, and including a aging Serbian, is the highest of all. What was the commentator thinking? That Fritz, in 2025, was a legitimate contender to defeat them all back-to-back? That it was worth commenting on the ongoing drought of American men lifting grand slams when he had exited the US Open in the quarter-finals? The thirst is just too much and the appreciation for the magnitude of the task too little.

The American's performance in that exact quarter-final ought to have been enough of an sign. Djokovic won in four rounds, a win that only seemed tenuous for brief periods towards the conclusion, when the American had saved a couple match points and had a chance to maintain serve for 5-5. The pair appeared well-balanced during the rallies, with Fritz earning numerous opportunities to break. But Djokovic saved service break opportunity after break point, extending the run to the brink of frustration. When he finally did claim one of the opportunities at 5-5 in the middle stanza, he immediately produced a horrendous service game to lose his own serve once more; Djokovic had lulled him into a battle secondary to the real battle and forced him to use far too much energy to prevail. Facing match points in the final game, his first serve sailed to the sky. He prolonged the match twice on his backup delivery, but ultimately double-faulted. It was not a collapse, in my opinion, just a result of having to hit too many weaker deliveries.

The match was quite compelling evidence that Fritz is insufficiently skilled to beat any version of Djokovic, who was defeated by the Spaniard in the following match and never particularly appeared like he thought he could win. This is perfectly acceptable – Djokovic is the greatest of all time, and may not be at the height of his athletic abilities anymore, but has acquired sufficient experience and strategic intelligence to make up for quite a bit of the decline. The issue is the individuals who were expecting the American to prevail, and pressuring him to achieve that, when he was yet to done anything that suggested he would.

The American is an asset to the tour regardless. He’s a patient, thoughtful presence in press conferences, more so than virtually everyone on the men's tour aside from the Russian star, willing to not just express how he feels or the tactic he felt decided a contest, but explain it. That he should bear the brunt of the blame for America failing to produce a male major champion since the last American titlist feels unjust. (Since Ben Shelton is competing alongside him in the standings, perhaps they can divide that load.)

“I’d probably think about it indefinitely if I don’t accomplish it,” the American informed a journalist in the summer of winning a grand slam. I hope he realizes that he’s not a failure if he doesn’t fulfill that objective, that overcoming Alcaraz and Sinner’s dominant, formidable empire is actually highly improbable for everybody else. {