US Male Major Title Dry Spell Isn't Fritz's Responsibility to Bear

I possess some thoughts regarding the remarks delivered by ESPN broadcaster Chris Fowler following the Serbian champion's victory over Taylor Fritz in the US Open quarter-finals. Look – Fritz is American, Fowler is American – and athletic competitions often lend themselves to nationalism. A little bit of letdown was understandable. Instead, Fowler invoked the continued absence 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 competition.

We all enjoy a narrative, myself included. But really. Suppose Fritz defeated the legend for the first time, force of nature the Spanish star was looming in the following match, whom he has never defeated in an competitive encounter. And had he somehow gotten past that, it would have been defending champion the Italian, versus him Fritz had lost 10 of the previous eleven sets. Alcaraz and Sinner had also divided the last seven major titles (and the Spaniard went on to defeat a tired Djokovic in the subsequent match). He said in post-match interviews following his defeat that he actually preferred his draw, because it presented the opportunity to beat the top three competitors in the world back-to-back. Fritz is more than within his right to aim for the accomplishment; an competitor is meant to have faith in themselves. But going into that Djokovic last eight match who else sensibly had the lack of US winners on the brain?

The American, 28, is ranked fourth in the global rankings entering the upcoming year-end championships and has won his last six matches over No 3 Alexander Zverev with growing comfort. Presumably he could take that spot for himself in the coming years. But evidently that at present, that’s as high as he can rise: Sinner and Alcaraz lie a vast gap of performance metrics away. His elite serve and powerful power on each forehand and backhand are sufficiently enough to defeat most opponents on the ATP tour. Against the select few once-in-a-lifetime players, though, he is frequently overmatched. The past few years has seen the interesting rise of tall, gangly athletes who can nonetheless move around with the alarming quickness and grace of smaller men. He is 6ft 5ins and appears that way. His footwork is rigid, as if he’s still getting used to his legs. So he’ll rarely win a rally that the opponent was dictating, and hitting a soft shot versus him is typically a safe bet. That serves as a quite harsh limitation on his potential.

The American has achieved a number of significant, unexpected improvements throughout his career. At the beginning of the decade, he was hovering around the lower end of the world's best thirty. Two years later, he was sniffing the top 10. Last year, he unexpectedly exploded up to fourth place – and held the position. But the next leap, competing against and beating all-time-greats like the young Spaniard, Sinner, and even a declining Djokovic, is the toughest of all. What was the commentator have been thinking? That Fritz, in 2025, was a serious threat to beat them all back-to-back? That it was appropriate commenting on the continuing drought of US male players winning grand slams when Fritz had departed the New York major in the quarter-finals? The thirst is just excessive and the respect for the difficulty of the task too little.

Fritz’s play in that very quarter-final ought to have been sufficient of an sign. Djokovic won in four sets, a victory that only seemed tenuous for brief periods towards the very end, when Fritz had survived a few match points and had a chance to hold for 5-5. The duo looked evenly matched during the exchanges, with the American earning numerous opportunities to break. But Djokovic rescued service break opportunity after break point, prolonging the streak to the brink of agony. When he eventually did convert a single of the chances at 5-5 in the second set, he promptly produced a horrendous service game to lose his own serve again; the Serbian had drawn him into a skirmish secondary to the real battle and compelled him to expend far too much energy to prevail. Facing match points in the last game, Fritz’s first serve floated to the sky. He extended the contest two times on his second serve, but finally committed two errors. It was not a choke, in my opinion, just a result of having to hit too many second serves.

The contest was fairly compelling proof that the American is insufficiently skilled to defeat any form of Djokovic, who lost to the Spaniard in the next round and did not particularly seem like he believed he could win. This is perfectly fine – the Serbian is the best player ever, and might not be at the height of his physical powers now, but has acquired enough knowledge and tactical know-how to compensate for quite a bit of the decline. The problem is those who were anticipating the American to prevail, and pressuring him to do so, when he was had not accomplished anything that suggested he would.

The American is an valuable contributor to the circuit nonetheless. He’s a patient, reflective voice in media sessions, exceeding virtually anyone on the ATP except for the Russian star, prepared to not just say his emotions or the tactic he felt decided a match, but explain it. That he ought to bear the brunt of the responsibility for the United States failing to spawn a men's grand slam winner since the last American titlist seems unjust. (Now that Ben Shelton is rubbing shoulders with him in the rankings, maybe they can divide that load.)

“I would likely think about it forever if I don’t do it,” Fritz informed a journalist in June of winning a major. It is hoped he realizes that he’s not a failure if he doesn’t achieve that objective, that overcoming Alcaraz and Sinner’s young, terrifying empire is actually extremely unlikely for everybody else. {